M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED versus V. B. R. MENON & OTHERS

M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED versus V. B. R. MENON & OTHERS

The Supreme Court held that the NGT has the power to direct the CPCB to exercise its powers under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for environmental protection, but it was unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances to make obtaining CTE and CTO mandatory for all existing and future retail petroleum outlets. The Court upheld the NGT's directions concerning installation of VRS/VRD (para 69(i) and (ii)) and directed CPCB and State Pollution Control Boards to ensure compliance with the CPCB circulars (including Circular dated 04.06.2021) and the CPCB Office Memorandum dated 07.01.2020; it set aside the NGT directions in para 69(iii) and (iv) requiring mandatory...

Parties
Appellant: M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED; Respondent: Central Pollution Control Board; Respondent (original Applicant): V. B. R. Menon
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Disposed
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; impugned directions in para 69(iii) and 69(iv) set aside; directions in para 69(i) and 69(ii) upheld and modified directions issued to CPCB and SPCBs
Legal Topics
Vapour Recovery System (vrs/vrd), Consent to Establish (cte), Consent to Operate (cto), NGT Powers Under Section 5 of the Environment (protection) Act, 1986, Compliance and Enforcement by State Pollution Control Boards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED

Appellant

Central Pollution Control Board

Respondent

V. B. R. Menon

Respondent (original Applicant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Disposed

  1. 1 Whether the NGT can issue directions which are in the nature of legislative functions
  2. 2 Whether public and private oil marketing companies/retail outlets are required to obtain Consent to Establish and/or Consent to Operate for establishment and operation
  3. 3 Whether the NGT can impose requirement of obtaining an additional approval to regulate or supervise compliance of CPCB guidelines

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the NGT has the power to direct the CPCB to exercise its powers under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for environmental protection, but it was unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances to make obtaining CTE and CTO mandatory for all existing and future retail petroleum outlets. The Court upheld the NGT's directions concerning installation of VRS/VRD (para 69(i) and (ii)) and directed CPCB and State Pollution Control Boards to ensure compliance with the CPCB circulars (including Circular dated 04.06.2021) and the CPCB Office Memorandum dated 07.01.2020; it set aside the NGT directions in para 69(iii) and (iv) requiring mandatory...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; impugned directions in para 69(iii) and 69(iv) set aside; directions in para 69(i) and 69(ii) upheld and modified directions issued to CPCB and SPCBs

Orders

  • The CPCB shall ensure that all retail petroleum outlets located in cities with population of more than 10 lakh and having turnover of more than 300 KL/month install VRS mechanism within the fresh timeline prescribed in its Circular dated 04.06.2021 and ensure compliance with NGT directions contained in para 69(i)...
  • Directions in para 69(iii) and 69(iv) of the NGT, Chennai order are set aside; instead CPCB is directed to instruct all State Pollution Control Boards to ensure strict adherence to the guidelines issued by CPCB vide Office Memorandum dated 07.01.2020