POLITICS NEWS

Government inaction to clean Kolkata canals under judicial scanner

National Green Tribunal, a dedicated judicial body looking exclusively on environmental violations, has passed two back-to-back orders recently on polluting Adi Ganga, Bagjola and Kestopur canals flowing through the city based on allegations that the government has not complied with tribunal’s directions to stop pollution in these canals despite orders being issued long back. The […]

National Green Tribunal, a dedicated judicial body looking exclusively on environmental violations, has passed two back-to-back orders recently on polluting Adi Ganga, Bagjola and Kestopur canals flowing through the city based on allegations that the government has not complied with tribunal’s directions to stop pollution in these canals despite orders being issued long back.

The canals – Adi Ganga in southern part of the city while Bagjola and Kestopur in city’s are mainly in the northern half – are considered lifeline for the drainage of the city as well as for its overall environmental upkeep.

The eastern zonal bench of National Green Tribunal (NGT) has constituted a high-power committee to probe the allegation of environmentalist Subhas Datta that nothing has been done to rejuvenate Adi Ganga, also known as Tolly’s nullah, despite specific orders being issued by the tribunal 19 months back in September 21, 2020.

Similarly in a subsequent verdict, the special bench of the national green tribunal led by its national chairman, has passed a series of directives on H. K. Dwivedi, chief secretary of West Bengal government, regarding minimizing severe pollution in Kestopur and Bagjola canals; observing that “there is practically no improvement” despite several orders being passed over last five years.

Adi Ganga under scanner

The proposed committee, comprising of senior officials from central pollution control board; Kolkata Municipal Corporation; Kolkata metropolitan development authority; West Bengal Pollution Control Board, has been asked to examine the “allegations made in the original application and submit its report by the next date of listing giving its suggestions with regard to rejuvenation of the river and action taken in pursuance of the previous directions”.

The tribunal, comprising of Justice B. Amit Sthalekar and expert member Saibal Dasgupta, outlined the unresolved matters as per Datta’s allegation as follows:

· Detailed project report yet to be finalised to construct sewage treatment plant to arrest discharges of sewage water to the river,

· Removal of encroachments, set to be completed within 6 months, not done.

· Removal of cow and buffalo sheds or khatals not done.

· No fencing of the river banks done

· No action by state PCB against metro and other offenders for polluting the river

· Garbage dumping continues

“The Tribunal had …directed the respondents to file a report of compliance by 04.02.2021… we find that no affidavit of compliance has been filed by the respondents”, pointed out the bench.

The bench also mentioned about the “other adverse developments concerning Adi Ganga” to be considered by the committee which include HIDCO’s proposed programme to put 1 km of river stretch within concrete covering – reported by The Plurals earlier – pipe-lines being laid by KMDA for a water supply project , low-height bridge constructed at Kalighat in such a manner that flow of the river is obstructed and floating garbage getting accumulated.

“The above works will directly clash with the rejuvenation programme of Adi Ganga, which has been undertaken by National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG) as per the directions of the tribunal” alleged Datta. The next date of hearing will be on July, 21, 2022.

Chief Secretary asked to look into Bagjola and Kestopur

The bench, chaired by NGT chairperson Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel, directed chief secretary “to review the existing monitoring mechanisms and setting up of CCTV cameras at suitable locations, constitution of a special task force with specified responsibilities and accountabilities for the failure (and) periodical review at appropriate higher level not below the level of principal secretary”.

The order was passed on the basis of complaints made by environmentalist Datta, an amicus curiae meaning adviser to the court in this particular case, on government’s failure to implement bench’s earlier orders; and the bench made it clear that it expects “prompt and meaningful action at the highest level”.

The proceedings in this matter were initiated in July 2016 suomoto by NGT when its Kolkata bench came to know about the pollution in Kestopur and Bagjola canals that was adversely affecting the health of local inhabitants and the environment. Since then, a series of orders were passed by the government to clean up the canals.

“… Huge pollution of the canals is an established fact and remedial actions so far taken are insignificant. Thus, there is utter failure of the responsibility of the state authorities of preventing pollution of the rivers, canals and water bodies …” observed the bench.

The major directives of NGT benches from time to time include;

· To prepare a topographical map of the existing water body from Ultadanga to Dum Dum Park.

· To prepare a detailed project report for construction of an outlet at Dum Dum park to connect Nayanjuli with Kestopur canal that falls into the main Bagjola canal.

· South Dum Dum municipality to make the nayanjuli from Sribhumi park to Dum Dum park free and cleared of all aquatic plants and de-silt the stretch.

· Beautification to take place leaving a space of 3 meters from the flood line and undertaking a massive plantation programme.

· Removal of all building debris and garbage dumped in the water body at various places all along the surviving Nayanjuli, particularly at Bangur area.

“None of the directives have been fully complied so far and I recently brought it to the notice of the bench”, said Datta.

The bench disposed off the case but directed the government to file an action taken report before the registrar of eastern zonal bench of the tribunal by Nov 15, 2022. However, the bench kept ajar the possibility of intervening again in the case stating that “if found necessary, the report may be placed before the bench”.

×