High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

Retail Petrol Pump in large cities must install VRS within timeline – Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court in a recent Judgement (M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. V.B.R. Menon & Others D.D. 14th March 2023) directed the CPCB to ensure that its guidelines for the installation of Vapor Recovery Systems (VRS) in petroleum outlets are strictly followed and all retail petroleum outlets in cities with a population of more than 10 lakh and a turnover of more than 300 KL/Month install the VRS mechanism within the prescribed timeline. The State Pollution Control Boards have been directed to ensure compliance with these guidelines and proceed against erring outlets in accordance with the law.

The Indian Supreme Court has modified the directions issued by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in a legal case where multiple appeals were made to challenge an order passed by the NGT's Southern Zone, Chennai. The lead matter in this case is Civil Appeal No. 2039 of 2022, filed by Reliance BP Mobility Limited against the NGT's order directing the Central Pollution Control Board and State Pollution Control Boards to issue directions to make it mandatory to obtain Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate for new and existing retail petroleum outlets.

The NGT's original application was filed by a resident of Chennai, raising the issue of non-installation of Vapour Recovery Systems (VRS) in petroleum outlets by oil marketing companies. The NGT disposed of the application by directing the installation of VRS mechanisms in petroleum outlets within specific timeframes and imposing environmental compensation for non-compliance. The Central Pollution Control Board and State Pollution Control Boards were directed to issue directions under various environmental protection acts to make it mandatory to obtain consent for new and existing retail petroleum outlets.

The NGT has jurisdiction and powers outlined in Sections 14 to 20 of the NGT Act, which include both original and appellate jurisdiction. The NGT can adjudicate upon civil cases relating to the environment, grant relief and compensation to victims of pollution, and order restitution of property or the environment. If an award or order of the NGT is not complied with, the person in whose favor the award was passed can seek execution of the award under Section 25 or seek prosecution of the offenders before a criminal court under Section 26.

The Supreme Court in this case has held that the directions issued by the NGT making it mandatory for petroleum outlets to obtain Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate are not reasonable and need to be modified. The Court has also noted that the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has classified automobile fuel outlets as "green" and exempted them from consent management in its directions/guidelines dated 30.04.2020 and 07.03.2016.

The Court has directed the CPCB to ensure that its guidelines for the installation of Vapor Recovery Systems (VRS) in petroleum outlets are strictly followed and all retail petroleum outlets in cities with a population of more than 10 lakh and a turnover of more than 300 KL/Month install the VRS mechanism within the prescribed timeline. The State Pollution Control Boards have been directed to ensure compliance with these guidelines and proceed against erring outlets in accordance with the law.

Overall, the Supreme Court has modified the directions of the NGT and has directed the CPCB and State Pollution Control Boards to ensure compliance with their respective guidelines for the protection of the environment.

M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. V.B.R. Menon & Others

Latest Legal News