Item No.09 Court No.

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

M.A. No. 26/2019

IN
Original Application No. 325/2015

Lt. Col. Sarvadaman Singh Oberoi Applicant(s)

Versus

Union of India &Ors. Respondent(s)

Date of hearing: 10.05.2019

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P. WANGDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON’BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER

For Applicant(s): Ms. Nivedita Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Lt. Col.
Sarvadaman Singh Oberoi, Applicant

For Respondent(s): Mr. Anil Grover, AAG, State of Haryana and Mr.
Rahul Khurana, Advocate

ORDER

1. The issue for consideration in the original application is

identification, protection and restoration of water bodies in the State

of Haryana. However, in the light of proceedings which have taken

place, we are of the view that the scope of the application needs to

be extended to the entire country in the interest of protection of

environment.
‘

2. This application was filed on 14.08.2015 before this Tribunal in the

context of Gurgaon District and as per status report as on

1
 09.03.2017 filed before this Tribunal on behalf of State of Haryana

referred to in the order dated 20.07.2018, there are 1216 water

bodies in the State of Haryana which are larger than 2.25 Ha and

123 water bodies which are in possession of the State in Gurgaon

District while the total number of the water bodies are 641 (later

corrected as 647) in Gurgaon District. The Tribunal directed that for

123 water bodies which are in possession of the State, steps be

taken for their proper maintenance and restoration. An exercise be

undertaken in the entire State of Haryana to identify water bodies.

On such identification, water bodies be assigned Unique

Identification (UID) number and steps be taken for restoration.

Report was sought within six months.

3. Status report has been filed vide email dated 25.04.2019 by the

Haryana Pond and Waste Water Management Authority (HPWWMA)

stating that HPWWMA has been established under a State Act called

the HPWWMA Act, 2018 notified on 23.10.2018 for development and

protection of ponds and matters connected therewith. Pond has

been defined as a tank or lake or any other inland water body

having an area of 0.5 acre or more. The authority is to undertake

survey and take steps for restoration of water bodies, PDMS (Pond

Data management System) has been developed which can be

accessed through “http://hpwwma.org”: DPMOs (District Pond

Management Officers) are appointed for each District. As per PDMS

data, 16306 ponds fall under the Panchayats and 265 ponds fall

under the Urban Local Bodies. The same have been given UID

2
 numbers and work of development will be undertaken by DPD

(Development and Panchayat Department). The work for connecting

the ponds with the nearby canal network will be executed by the

IWRD (Irrigation and water Resources Department). 200 most

problematic and overflowing ponds will be addressed during 2019-

20. 193 model ponds which are overlapping with the said 200 ponds

will be developed in first phase for which a plan has been prepared.

4. The Gurgaon Metropolitan Development Authority (GMDA) has also

given a report to the effect that water bodies in the District are

owned by 20 different entities. Work of restoration of 123 water

bodies was taken up which has been widened to improve 647 water

bodies. In all 826 water bodies, as found as per record, the task

involves identification and verification of data, review and

categorization of water bodies, assigning UID numbers, preparation

of maps and analysis of information in regard to size, restoration

potential, etc. 20% of the water bodies are at risk due to discharge

of untreated sewage, industrial effluents or waste water.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that not even a single

water body has so far been taken up for restoration inspite of the

exercise undertaken for identification of the water bodies. The steps

for preventing dumping of solid waste or discharging of effluents are

urgently required. The State of Haryana may take necessary steps in

terms of the status report referred to in para 3 & 4 above as well as

in the light of general directions which we propose to issue to all the

States/UTs.

3
6. There can be no dispute that the water bodies play significant role in

recharge of ground water, preventing soil erosion, harnessing rain

water and maintaining micro-climate in the area. Need for

conservation and protection of water bodies is thus obvious. This

requires involvement not only at the level of the State but also at the

level of the community for which State needs to take initiative. The

threat caused to the water bodies is by dumping of waste, discharge

of effluents and encroachments. The steps required for restoration

will include preparation and implementation of catchment area

treatment plans, setting up of green belt and wherever viable setting

up of bio-diversity parks around the water bodies, cleaning up of the

garbage/debris and demarcation by the Revenue Department on

identification survey and demarcation. Each water body is required

to be given a geo-referenced-UID and an action plan is required for

restoration and protection of each of the water bodies. In this view

of the matter, need for conservation and protection of water bodies is

not confined to the State of Haryana alone but extends to the whole

country.

7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi &

Ors. (2001) 6 SCC 496 observed:

“It is important to notice that the material resources of

the community like forests, tanks, ponds, hillock,
mountain etc. are nature's bounty. They maintain
delicate ecological balance. They need to be protected
for a proper and healthy environment which enables

4
 people to enjoy a quality life which is the essence of the
guaranteed right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Government, including the Revenue Authorities i.e.
Respondents 11 to 13, having noticed that a pond is
falling in disuse, should have bestowed their attention
to develop the same which would, on one hand, have
prevented ecological disaster and on the other provided
better environment for the benefit of the public at large.
Such vigil is the best protection against knavish
attempts to seek allotment in non-abadi sites.”

8. The above observations advance the Public Trust Doctrine which is

based on the principle that certain resources like air, water and

forests have such great importance to the people as a whole that the

same cannot be subject of private ownership. The same are gift of

the nature and should be made freely available to the people. The

Doctrine requires the State to protect such resources and not to

permit them to be used for private or commercial purposes.1 This

concept is applicable to wetlands and all water bodies which is

essential for protection of the environment. If the ponds and other

such water bodies are not protected and conserved, this will in turn

affect recharge of ground water, rain water harnessing and soil

preservation.

9. Ground water conservation remains a challenge. This led the

Hon’ble Supreme Court to direct constitution of the Central Ground

Water Authority (CGWA) vide order reported in M.C Mehta v. Union of

1
(1997) 1 SCC 388, M.C. Mehta vs Kamal Nath & Ors

5
 India & Ors, (1997) 11 SCC 312. The data compiled by the said

authority shows that there are over exploited, critical and semi

critical areas (OCS). The ground water is on the decline in the said

areas. In this regard, it may be noted that vide order dated

11.07.2018 in W.P.C No. 4677/1985, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India

and Ors., the Hon’ble Supreme Court noted the report of the Niti

Ayog on “Composite Water Management Index”, June 2018, in which

it is stated, inter alia:

“In fact by 2020, 21 major cities, including Delhi,

Bangalore and Hyderabad will are expected to reach
zero groundwater levels, affecting access for 100 million
people”.

10. The Tribunal has, vide order dated 07.05.2019 in O.A No. 176/2015,

Shailesh Singh Vs. Hotel Holiday Regency, Moradabad & Ors.,

directed the CGWA to prepare a policy for conservation of

groundwater with a robust institutional mechanism for surveillance

and monitoring with a view to enhance access to ground water for

drinking purposes in OCS areas by way of appropriate

replenishment practices which can be properly accounted and

measured as well as to sustain the flood plains of rivers in terms of

e-flows, augmentation of subterranean flows and preservation of

other water bodies. The Tribunal also considered the matter in the

context of Delhi, vide order dated 30.08.2018 in Original Application

No. 496 of 2016, Tribunal on its own Motion Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

& Ors., and appointed a Committee headed by the former Judge of

Delhi High Court to oversee the steps for conservation of ground

6
water in Delhi. We also note the guidelines for National Lake

Conservation Plan prepared by MoEF&CC in May 2008 as well as

National Plan for Conservation of Aquatic Ecosystem (NPCA)

prepared by MoEF&CC in November, 2016. Irrespective of the

subject being covered by a particular State statute, the protection of

water bodies is an essential need for protection of environment as

held in Hinch Lal Tiwari (Supra). Such requirement is covered by the

‘Precautionary’ principle as well as the ‘Sustainable Development’

principle which are required to be enforced by this Tribunal under

Section 20 of the NGT Act, 2010. The HPWWMA Act, 2018 covers

only ponds having area of more than 0.5 acres. Thus ponds of

lesser area have been left out of regulation under the said Act. This

aspect needs to be addressed to the extent the same remains un-

addressed not only in Haryana but throughout India to the extent

the existing statutory framework or guidelines do not cover

comprehensively the subject of restoration of all the water bodies.

The definition of water body in the Haryana Act is as follows:

“the ‘pond’ means a tank or lake or any other inland

water body having an area of 0.5 acre or more, whether it
contains water or not, and mentioned in revenue records
as talab, johar, tank or by any other name and includes
green belt and the peripheral catchments areas, main
feeder inlet and other inlets, bunds, weirs, sluices etc but
does not include wet lands as notified by the Government
from time to time.”

7
11. The above definition shows that only ponds of area of more than 0.5

acres are sought to be restored under the statutory provisions of the

said Act. While in terms of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in Hinch Lal Tiwari (Supra) even ponds of lesser area will be covered

for being protected and restored. This is also imperative in terms of

the concern raised in the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated

11.07.2018 in W.P.C Nos. 4677/1985, M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India

&Ors. for conservation of ground water. If all water bodies including

ponds of lesser area than 0.5 acre are not covered, this will affect

the environment including recharge of ground water, harnessing of

rain water, prevention of soil erosion and maintaining the micro

climate. We may, however, clarify that focus may be on ponds, etc.

recorded in the revenue record.

12. We may note that there are 351 polluted river stretches in India

identified as such by the CPCB which need remediation. The matter

is being considered by this Tribunal in Original Application

No.673/2018, News item published in “The Hindu”authored by Shri

Jacob Koshy titled “More river stretches are now critically polluted :

CPCB. In O.A. No. 148/2016, Mahesh Chandra Saxena Vs. South

Delhi Municipal Corporation &Ors., vide order dated10.05.2019, it

was observed that reuse of treated sewage water as well as

restoration of water bodies are connected to ground water

conservation, which in turn is connected to remedying the pollution

of polluted river stretches.

8
13. Thus to give effect to ‘Precautionary’ principle and ‘Sustainable

Development’ principle, we direct all the States and UTs to review

the existing framework of restoration all the water bodies by

preparing an appropriate action plan. Such action plans may be

prepared within three months and a report furnished to the CPCB.

The CPCB may examine all such plans and furnish its comments to

this Tribunal within two months thereafter. The Chief Secretaries of

all the States/UTs in the course of undertaking monitoring exercise

in pursuance of the order of this Tribunal in O.A No. 606/2018,

Compliance of MSW Rules, 2016, may also include restoration of

water bodies as one of the items as the same is also incidental to

waste management which are covered by orders in O.A No.

606/2018, Compliance of MSW Rules, 2016.

14. The CPCB may prepare and place on its website guidelines in the

matter of restoration of water bodies in the light of above order

within one month.

15. The matter may also be monitored by Central Monitoring Committee

constituted in terms of order dated 08.04.2019 in O.A No.

673/2018, News item published in “The Hindu” authored by Shri

Jacob Koshy titled “More river stretches are now critically polluted :

CPCB, as this matter is connected to the steps required for

remedying the polluted river stretches as already explained.

16. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretaries of all the States

and Union Territories and the CPCB by email.

9
List for further consideration on 09.12.2019.

Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP

S.P. Wangdi, JM

K. Ramakrishnan, JM

Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM

May 10, 2019

M.A. No. 26/2019
INOriginal Application No. 325/2015
AK

10