Thousands of Dead Fish in Yamuna Spark NGT Action; CPCB Asked to Coordinate States

The National Green Tribunal has taken suo motu cognizance of a disturbing incident reported on July 4, 2024, when thousands of dead fish were found along the banks of the Yamuna river in Burari, Delhi.

The sight of the carcasses created a severe stench, causing inconvenience to nearby villagers and raising immediate concerns about the state of pollution in the river.

The news item, which appeared on Jagran.com, prompted the Tribunal to register Original Application No. 923 of 2024 and open proceedings to ascertain the cause of the mass mortality and fix responsibility for preventing such incidents in the future.

The matter came up before the Principal Bench of the NGT on September 17, 2025, comprising Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Chairperson and A. Senthil Vel, Expert Member.

In its order, the Tribunal noted, “In this Original Application, registered suo-motu the Tribunal is considering the incident of death of thousands of fishes in the River Yamuna in Delhi’s Burari and the news item discloses that the fishes had died due to chemical laden water from the factories, hence the issue of pollution in River Yamuna in the relevant stretch also arises… In this matter, the Authorities of the State of Haryana and Delhi are shifting the responsibility on each other. Hence, we require the Member Secretary, CPCB, to hold a Joint Meeting of the concerned authorities of the State of Haryana and Delhi and fix a responsibility and also chalk out a program for preventing such an incident in future. The Respondent No. 1, Member Secretary CPCB, will file the report in compliance of the above direction within eight weeks.”

The Tribunal's intervention followed multiple submissions by different authorities, which revealed the complex interplay of jurisdictional accountability between Delhi and Haryana.

A significant early step was the filing of submissions by the District Magistrate (Central), Delhi, in June 2025.

The District Magistrate enclosed a joint inspection report, which revealed that the fish deaths were directly linked with the sudden entry of highly polluted water into the Yamuna. The report found that untreated industrial effluents and unauthorized discharges had entered the river through adjoining drains, drastically lowering dissolved oxygen levels and resulting in large-scale fish mortality.

The District Magistrate underscored that the event had not only caused environmental degradation but also created serious public nuisance, with unbearable odor emanating from the riverbanks and distress caused to local inhabitants.

In parallel, the State of Haryana and the Haryana State Pollution Control Board, arrayed as Respondents 6 and 7, filed their reply.

Their response was aimed at distancing themselves from liability, stating that there was no evidence of discharge from Haryana reaching the Burari stretch of the Yamuna. According to them, the pollution incident had its roots within Delhi’s territory and should be addressed by Delhi-based authorities. This stand effectively shifted the burden away from Haryana and led to finger pointing between the two neighboring jurisdictions.

The Tribunal also examined the role of the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG).

Counsel for NMCG sought to argue that responsibility for the particular stretch of the Yamuna lay with the River Rejuvenation Committee. However, the Tribunal rejected this stand, emphasizing that under the River Ganga (Rejuvenation, Protection and Management) Authorities Order, 2016, the obligations of the NMCG extended to the Ganga and its tributaries, which necessarily included the Yamuna.

Clause 4 of the 2016 Order requires restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological quality of river waters in a time-bound manner.

Clause 38 sets out the duties of the NMCG, including the responsibility to undertake or abstain from acts necessary for rejuvenation and protection of the Ganga and its tributaries.

Clause 39 elaborates on its functions, which include ensuring effective coordination between states and central agencies. By these provisions, the Tribunal made it clear that the NMCG cannot wash its hands of accountability by pushing the matter entirely to state-level committees.

The directions of September 17, 2025, therefore, place the burden squarely on the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to convene a joint meeting of officials from Haryana and Delhi, to fix responsibility for the lapses that led to the fish mortality incident, and to establish a comprehensive program aimed at preventing future occurrences.

The Member Secretary of CPCB has been ordered to file a compliance report within eight weeks, and the matter has been listed for further consideration on December 1, 2025.

The case is emblematic of the larger challenges in governing the nation's urban rivers. The Yamuna, which provides a majority of Delhi's water supply, has for long been under stress from industrial effluents, untreated sewage, and solid waste.

The mass death of fish in Burari is not only an ecological tragedy but also a public health warning, indicating dangerously low oxygen levels and chemical contamination in the water. Residents reported unbearable foul odor and disruption of daily life, while environmental experts flagged the incident as a stark indicator of systemic failure in pollution control and river rejuvenation efforts.

The Tribunal's intervention underscores the urgency of cooperative federalism in environmental governance. Rather than engaging in jurisdictional wrangles, Delhi and Haryana, along with central agencies like NMCG and CPCB, are expected to adopt a coordinated approach.

The directions of the Tribunal reinforce the principle that statutory bodies cannot abdicate their legal responsibilities by blaming one another. Whether the joint mechanism proposed by CPCB will translate into effective, on ground action remains to be seen, but for now, the Tribunal has put all stakeholders on notice that accountability cannot be evaded.

The incident of July 2024 has therefore set into motion a legal process that could determine not only how responsibilities are fixed in the present case but also how inter-state river pollution disputes are addressed in the future. 

Counsel for the respondents: Mr. Mohit Singhal, Mr. Narender Pal Singh, Mr. Gigi. C. George, Ms. Jyoti Mendirata, Ms. Ananya Basudha, Mr. Rahul Khurana, Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Advs.

Case Title: News Item titled “Delhi News Burari mein Yamuna nadee kinare mrit avastha mein milee hazaaro machhliyan, durgandh se gramin pareshan”

Date of Decision: September 17, 2025

Bench: Justice Prakash Shrivastava (Chairperson) and Dr. A. Senthil Vel (Expert Member)