NGT Seeks Clarification from DPCC on Inspections of Alleged Illegal Dyeing Units in Delhi
Pranav B Prem
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) Principal Bench at New Delhi has directed the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) to submit an additional report clarifying inspection details in a case concerning the alleged operation of dyeing and washing units without requisite environmental consents across several parts of Delhi.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Justice Prakash Shrivastava (Chairperson), Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi (Judicial Member) and Dr. Afroz Ahmad (Expert Member). The proceedings arose out of an application filed by environmental activist Varun Gulati, who alleged that several units were functioning illegally without consent, no-objection certificates (NOCs), or permissions in localities such as Bindapur, Matiala, Ranhola, Khyala, Meethapur, Badarpur, Mukundpur and Kirar. According to the applicant, these units were discharging untreated effluents and contributing significantly to pollution in Delhi.
DPCC’s Action Taken Report
The DPCC filed its action taken report dated 20 May 2025, which disclosed that joint inspections were carried out on 8 April, 7 May and 8 May 2025 by teams comprising officials from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), BSES, Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) office, Delhi Jal Board (DJB) and DPCC.
A total of 22 premises were inspected during these visits. While several locations did not reveal any dyeing or washing activity, two premises were found engaged in jeans dyeing and washing operations. These units were sealed by SDM Sarita Vihar officials in the presence of MCD, DJB, BSES and DPCC representatives. The DPCC also reported that action for levying Environmental Damage Compensation (EDC) was underway against these violators.
Applicant’s Objections
The applicant, through counsel, contested the report, arguing that the geo-coordinates mentioned in DPCC’s action taken report did not correspond to the coordinates supplied earlier on 28 February and 3 March 2025 to the DPCC’s CMC Cell. It was submitted that inspections were therefore carried out at incorrect locations, leaving out the actual sites of ongoing violations.
Counsel for the applicant further pointed out that a fresh inspection had taken place only a few days prior to the hearing, but the details of that inspection had not been included in DPCC’s report.
Tribunal’s Directions
Taking note of these objections, the Bench recorded: “Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to file objection to the action taken report of the DPCC dated 20.05.2025 disclosing the full details of the geo-coordinates and locations which were supplied by the applicant to the respondent-DPCC and further material to support the plea that the proper inspection has not been carried out.”
The Tribunal granted the applicant four weeks’ time to file objections, with liberty to annex the correct geo-coordinates and other supporting material. DPCC was given six weeks thereafter to file an additional report addressing the issues raised. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 3 September 2025.
Context and Significance
The NGT has repeatedly stressed the obligation of regulatory authorities to ensure accurate site inspections and strict enforcement of environmental norms. In past cases like Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court had held that no industrial unit could be permitted to function without appropriate effluent treatment facilities. Similarly, in the series of directions issued in MC Mehta v. Union of India, the Court emphasized the prevention of hazardous discharge into Delhi’s water bodies.
By seeking clarification and insisting on correct geo-coordinates in the present case, the Tribunal has underscored its supervisory role to ensure that compliance monitoring does not become a mere procedural formality but results in tangible curbing of illegal industrial activity. The move to impose Environmental Damage Compensation also reflects the continuing application of the “polluter pays” principle in environmental jurisprudence.
Ultimately, the Tribunal did not dispose of the matter but directed further scrutiny. The applicant has been allowed to file objections within four weeks, while DPCC has been directed to submit an additional report within six weeks. The case will next be heard on 3 September 2025, when the Tribunal will examine whether proper inspections were carried out and whether enforcement action against errant dyeing units is adequate.
Appearance
Applicant: Ms. Mansi Chahal, Adv. for Applicant
Respondents: Ms. Sakshi Popli, Adv. for DPCC (Through VC) Ms. Puja S. Kalra & Mr. Virendra Singh, Advs. for MCD Mr. Inderjeet, SI, PS - Jaitpur, South East Distt.
Cause Title: Varun Gulati v. Govt. of NCT Delhi
Case No: Original Application No. 353/2023
Coram: Justice Prakash Shrivastava [Chairperson], Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi [Judicial Member], Dr. Afroz Ahmad [Expert Member]
