The National Green Tribunal has issued a decisive order compelling enforcement of environmental statutes against unchecked construction activities that endanger public health. This case underscores the Tribunal’s proactive role in translating statutory obligations into actionable remedies when regulatory agencies fail to act.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The applicants, residents of the existing Tulsi Tower in Bhopal, allege sustained environmental violations by the Madhya Pradesh Housing & Infrastructure Development Board and its contractor, M/s. Madhure Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., during construction of the adjacent Tulsi Green Project. Despite holding Environmental Clearance dated 03.07.2022, the respondents are operating in flagrant disregard of multiple environmental statutes and conditions.
Procedural History
- The matter was filed as an Original Application before the National Green Tribunal’s Central Zone Bench on 13 January 2026.
- No prior enforcement action had been taken by the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board despite repeated complaints.
- The Tribunal issued notice to respondents and directed a site inspection by a Joint Committee.
Relief Sought
The applicants sought immediate cessation of unlawful construction activities, enforcement of noise, air, and waste management norms, and remedial measures to mitigate health impacts on residents, including children and the elderly.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether continuous environmental violations during construction, including unregulated dust, noise, and wastewater discharge, trigger mandatory enforcement duties under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, and the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, even in the absence of formal complaints to the Pollution Control Board.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The applicant’s counsel argued that the respondents are in clear breach of multiple statutory obligations:
- Failure to install wind-breaking barricades or wet-jet systems violates Sub-Clause V of Clause II of SEAC’s environmental conditions.
- Night-time construction exceeding 45 dB(A) Leq. contravenes Rule 5 of the Noise Pollution Rules.
- Absence of a functional Sewage Treatment Plant constitutes illegal discharge under the Water Act.
- Open dumping of construction debris violates the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. They cited M.C. Mehta v. Union of India to emphasize the state’s duty to protect the right to a healthy environment under Article 21.
For the Respondent
No written reply was submitted by the respondents prior to the hearing. The Tribunal noted the absence of any defense or compliance report from the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, indicating systemic regulatory failure.
The Court's Analysis
The Tribunal emphasized that environmental rights are not contingent on formal complaints but arise from the state’s affirmative duty under constitutional and statutory mandates. The Court observed that the cumulative impact of dust, noise, and wastewater on vulnerable populations - children and the elderly - constitutes a violation of the right to life with dignity under Article 21.
"The proximity of the construction site to an occupied residential tower, coupled with the canyon effect amplifying noise and the absence of any dust suppression, creates a public health emergency that cannot be ignored by regulatory authorities."
The Tribunal rejected the notion that environmental compliance is optional pending formal action by the Pollution Control Board. It held that statutory obligations are self-executing and that the Board’s failure to conduct mandatory six-monthly inspections constitutes dereliction of duty. The Court further noted that the lack of Consent to Operate (CTO) renders the construction activity illegal ab initio.
The Tribunal also affirmed that health impacts, including respiratory ailments, sleep deprivation, and vector-borne disease risks, are valid indicators of environmental harm under the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle.
The Verdict
The applicants prevailed. The National Green Tribunal held that statutory environmental obligations are non-negotiable and that regulatory inaction cannot legitimize violations. It directed the formation of a Joint Committee to inspect the site, enforce compliance, and recommend punitive action.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Enforcement Duty Is Triggered by Harm, Not Complaints
- Practitioners need not wait for Pollution Control Board action before approaching the NGT - demonstrable harm to public health suffices to invoke jurisdiction.
- Evidence of chronic exposure to dust, noise, or wastewater by residents near construction sites is sufficient to establish locus standi.
- The burden shifts to the state to prove compliance; failure to submit inspection reports or CTE/CTO documents creates a presumption of violation.
Regulatory Inaction Is Not a Defense
- The NGT has made clear that failure to conduct mandatory inspections under the Air and Water Acts constitutes a breach of statutory duty.
- Practitioners should cite this order when challenging delays or inaction by State Pollution Control Boards in pending matters.
- Any construction activity without valid CTE/CTO is illegal, regardless of Environmental Clearance status.
Health Impact Evidence Is Admissible as Environmental Harm
- Medical reports, affidavits from residents, and expert testimony on respiratory or sleep disorders can now be treated as prima facie evidence of environmental degradation.
- Courts will no longer require scientific air/water quality reports in every case - observable, cumulative harm to vulnerable groups is sufficient.
- Vector-borne disease risks from stagnant water due to STP failure are now recognized as direct consequences of construction negligence.
