Supreme Court Proposes 20-Point Plan To Revive Rajasthan's Polluted Rivers, Seeks Permanent Solution
Supreme Court proposed a 20-point action plan and asked Rajasthan to ensure long-term restoration of the Jojari, Luni and Bandi rivers without continuous judicial monitoring.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday proposed a comprehensive 20-point resolution plan to tackle pollution in Rajasthan's Jojari, Luni and Bandi rivers, stressing that the objective should be to establish a self-sustaining regulatory mechanism that no longer requires continuous judicial oversight.
The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta suggested that the Chief Secretary of Rajasthan head a Special Task Force comprising all concerned authorities, working alongside the High-Powered Committee, to prepare and submit a detailed 20-point action plan within three weeks.
Emphasising the need for institutional accountability, Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that the mechanism should function on "auto mode", ensuring that violations are detected immediately and corrective action is taken without repeated intervention by the Court.
The Bench expressed serious concern over industrial pollution in Pali, observing that the concentration of textile industries along the riverbank had made pollution control extremely difficult.
"One person puts a small outlet, how are you going to control it?" Justice Mehta remarked.
The Court suggested that, in the long term, the industrial area may have to be shifted away from the riverbank, observing that such relocation would not only protect the rivers but also facilitate planned urban development in the congested city.
The Bench directed the State to expedite pending approvals for Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs), particularly for industries discharging more than 100 KLD, while ensuring that applications from smaller industries are also processed without delay.
Justice Mehta also questioned the practice of the Chairperson of the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board simultaneously holding additional charge of the Mining Department, suggesting that the State consider appointing a full-time Chairperson exclusively for the Pollution Control Board.
The Court further flagged abandoned HRTS tanks in Balotra containing untreated industrial effluents and suggested that, after remediation, the reclaimed land could be developed into a forest as part of the State's long-term environmental restoration plan.
Appearing before the Court, Rajasthan Chief Secretary Mr. Srinivasan assured the Bench that the State acknowledged the gravity of the crisis and remained committed to achieving "zero untreated industrial discharge."
He informed the Court that Rajasthan would simultaneously focus on preventing fresh pollution, treating accumulated wastewater, removing sludge, augmenting infrastructure and restoring the river ecosystem.
Referring to the Jojari River as the "Maru Ganga", Justice Mehta emphasised that it deserved the same level of protection accorded to other major rivers and called for a permanent monitoring mechanism for its preservation.
Seeking three weeks' time, the Chief Secretary submitted that he would personally visit Pali, Jodhpur and Balotra, consult stakeholders and place a comprehensive action plan before the Court.
Justice Mehta clarified that the Court had no intention of adversely affecting livelihoods.
"There is no intention of destroying employment… but not at the cost of the environment," he observed.
The Bench directed priority consideration of pending ETP approvals for industries discharging over 100 KLD, observing that once treatment facilities become operational, industries could achieve zero liquid discharge and resume operations in compliance with environmental norms.
The Chief Secretary assured the Court that he would personally coordinate with the Pollution Control Board on the issue and said the State would adopt a three-pronged strategy centred on environmental compliance, engineering solutions and minimising employment losses.
Industry representatives submitted that the existing treatment infrastructure could process 18.5 million litres of wastewater per day if operated optimally, helping address the accumulated wastewater problem.
However, the Bench categorically rejected any suggestion that treated water should be released into the river. "Not even a drop of that tertiary treated water can be allowed in the river," Justice Mehta said.
The Court questioned the quality of treated water, referring to parameters such as pH, lead, heavy metals and total dissolved solids, and asked how such water could ever be permitted to mix with drinking water sources.
When industries argued that the prescribed discharge standards were difficult to achieve, Justice Mehta responded: "Technology is available. It's only a matter of intent."
He added that, if necessary, the State could financially support technological upgrades.
The Court repeatedly stressed that the ultimate objective must be zero liquid discharge through reuse of treated water rather than its release into rivers. "If it cannot be used by the textile industry itself, how can it be allowed into the river?" Justice Mehta asked.
When industries stated that meeting prescribed standards for accumulated wastewater could take between two and four months, the Bench remained unconvinced. "You are already destroying the environment for 10 good years… Why are you worried about four months now?"
Justice Mehta further refused to entertain queries on how industries should treat accumulated wastewater. "Don't ask us how to treat it. You are in the industry- you should know better."
Suggesting available technological solutions, he observed: "Recirculate it, resettle it. There are enough technologies available. Why are you putting this question to the Court?"
The Bench also questioned how untreated wastewater had been allowed to accumulate in the first place."What you could not accumulate, you allowed to bypass."
Reiterating that no discharge would be permitted unless it fully complied with prescribed standards, the Court turned its attention to Balotra, where concerns were raised regarding private industrial establishments allegedly operating on land earmarked for residential use, with portions also falling within a high flood zone.
Questioning the legality of such land-use conversion, Justice Mehta asked: "How do you convert a residential colony into an industrial area? How could you even think of doing that?"
Referring to the Full Bench judgment in the Gulab Kothari case, which prohibits such conversions, the Court was informed by the State that no fresh permissions were being granted and that existing industries in the area were gradually being shut down or relocated. "That's the solution. Shift them," the Bench observed.
The Court also questioned a proposal to establish another industrial area near the riverbank, cautioning the State against repeating previous mistakes. "Do you want another disaster to strike?"
The Chief Secretary assured the Court that he would personally examine the issue during his proposed visit and take corrective action wherever required.
The Bench also took note of submissions highlighting Balotra's groundwater crisis. It was pointed out that the area had been categorised as "overexploited" by the Central Ground Water Authority, with groundwater extraction already exceeding natural recharge levels, raising concerns over approvals for additional water-intensive industries.
The matter will now be taken up on August 7, when the Supreme Court is expected to pass further orders.
Last month, expressing serious concern over reports of widespread industrial pollution and environmental degradation in Rajasthan, the Supreme Court had directed the State government to file comprehensive affidavits addressing allegations of untreated industrial effluents contaminating rivers, groundwater, agricultural land and wildlife habitats.
Background of the Case
By constituting the committee last year, the Court had sought a detailed assessment of the environmental damage, the measures required to control pollution, and the steps needed for restoration of the river ecosystem.
On November 17, the Bench had come down heavily on state authorities while hearing a suo motu matter concerning rising pollution levels in rivers across Rajasthan. The Bench had expressed strong displeasure over what it described as administrative inaction despite clear evidence of environmental degradation. “What has happened is under your nose and with the connivance of all authorities. There is no other way,” Justice Mehta had remarked, signalling the court’s frustration with the state’s failure to curb contamination of major water bodies.
Previously on September 15, the Court had initiated the suo moto proceedings and had noted that the contamination was affecting hundreds of villages along the river and rendering the drinking water non-potable for local communities.
The Bench had considered the reports of widespread pollution, noting that the environmental and health impacts were severe and required immediate judicial attention. It had directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai for appropriate orders, indicating the possibility of constituting a larger Bench or forming a monitoring committee to oversee remedial action. The Court had emphasized that the situation required urgent intervention from both the State Government of Rajasthan and relevant Central authorities to prevent further harm to the affected population and ensure that industries comply with environmental regulations.