CWP-25244-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/s VS Real Projects Pvt. Ltd. Haryana Water Resources Authority and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present: SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE 1. petition seeks issuance of writ of certiorari quashing order dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P Environmental Compensation, pursuant to directions issued by the National Green Tribunal 03.10.2024 (Annexure P 444/2023, holding that the establishments, including the petitioner herein, liable for Environmental Compensatio 27.06.2025 (Annexure P 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M/s VS Real Projects Pvt. Ltd. Versus Haryana Water Resources Authority and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate (arguing counsel), with Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocate, Mr. Eklavya Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Aggarwal, Advocate, For the petitioner. Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. Addl. A.G, Haryana (arguing counsel), Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE Petitioner, which is a Private Limited Company, by way petition seeks issuance of writ of certiorari quashing order dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P-19) passed by Haryana Water Resources Authority, levying Environmental Compensation, pursuant to directions issued by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, vide order dated 03.10.2024 (Annexure P-5) rendered in Original Application (OA) No. 444/2023, holding that the establishments, including the petitioner herein, liable for Environmental Compensation. 27.06.2025 (Annexure P-20) by Chairperson, Haryana Water Resources -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-25244-2025 Date of Decision : 28.08.2025 …….Petitioner Haryana Water Resources Authority and others ...….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Akshay Bhan, Senior Advocate (arguing counsel), with Mr. Shantanu Bansal, Advocate, Mr. Eklavya Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Aggarwal, Advocate, Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. Addl. A.G, Haryana (arguing counsel), Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Petitioner, which is a Private Limited Company, by way of this petition seeks issuance of writ of certiorari quashing order dated 28.04.2025 19) passed by Haryana Water Resources Authority, levying Environmental Compensation, pursuant to directions issued by the National , Principal Bench, New Delhi, vide order dated in Original Application (OA) No. 444/2023, holding that the establishments, including the petitioner herein, . Consequent communication d 20) by Chairperson, Haryana Water Resources 2025 .08.2025 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. Addl. A.G, Haryana (arguing counsel), of this petition seeks issuance of writ of certiorari quashing order dated 28.04.2025 19) passed by Haryana Water Resources Authority, levying Environmental Compensation, pursuant to directions issued by the National , Principal Bench, New Delhi, vide order dated in Original Application (OA) No. 444/2023, holding that the establishments, including the petitioner herein, Consequent communication dated 20) by Chairperson, Haryana Water Resources NAROTAM DASS 2025.09.03 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-25244-2025 Authority, to the petitioner Company, asking it to make payment of Environmental Compensation, is also under challenge. 1.1 “5. Committee in its report against some of the respondents and has concluded that the ground water quality in the area is highly saline (TDS is 12800 mg/1) the same is not used for drinking and domest domestic requirements is being supplied by GMDA. HWRA are authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. 6. examine the report in accordance with law. 7. and 9 submit that they have filed objection/reply to the report of the Joint Committee. 8. objection/reply to the report of the Joint Committee, if they so desired. 9. 2. of admission as well as final disposal of the petition. 3. Resources Authority (Conservation, Regulation and Management) Authority Act, 2020 (for short, ‘Act of 2020’), is not empowered to levy or recover Environmental Compensation. 2025 Authority, to the petitioner Company, asking it to make payment of Environmental Compensation, is also under challenge. Vide aforesaid order dated 03.10.2024, the “5. Certain findings have also been recorded by Joint Committee in its report against some of the respondents and has concluded that the ground water quality in the area is highly saline (TDS is 12800 mg/1) the same is not used for drinking and domestic uses and water for drinking and domestic requirements is being supplied by GMDA. HWRA are authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. 6. Learned counsel for respondent no.5 seeks time to examine the report of the Joint Committee and take action in accordance with law. 7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 7 and 9 submit that they have filed objection/reply to the report of the Joint Committee. 8. It will be opened to the other respondents to fi objection/reply to the report of the Joint Committee, if they so desired. 9. List on 30.01.2025.” Learned senior counsel for the petitioner is heard on the question of admission as well as final disposal of the petition. Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the Haryana Water Resources Authority, constituted under the Haryana (Conservation, Regulation and Management) Authority Act, 2020 (for short, ‘Act of 2020’), is not empowered to levy or recover Environmental nsation. -2- Authority, to the petitioner Company, asking it to make payment of Environmental Compensation, is also under challenge. Vide aforesaid order dated 03.10.2024, the NGT directed thus : Certain findings have also been recorded by Joint Committee in its report against some of the respondents and has concluded that the ground water quality in the area is highly saline (TDS is 12800 mg/1) the same is not used for ic uses and water for drinking and domestic requirements is being supplied by GMDA. HWRA are authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. Learned counsel for respondent no.5 seeks time to of the Joint Committee and take action Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 7 and 9 submit that they have filed objection/reply to the It will be opened to the other respondents to file objection/reply to the report of the Joint Committee, if they Learned senior counsel for the petitioner is heard on the question of admission as well as final disposal of the petition. of the petitioner is that the Haryana Water constituted under the Haryana Water Resources (Conservation, Regulation and Management) Authority Act, 2020 (for short, ‘Act of 2020’), is not empowered to levy or recover Environmental Authority, to the petitioner Company, asking it to make payment of s :- Learned senior counsel for the petitioner is heard on the question of the petitioner is that the Haryana Water Water Resources (Conservation, Regulation and Management) Authority Act, 2020 (for short, ‘Act of 2020’), is not empowered to levy or recover Environmental NAROTAM DASS 2025.09.03 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-25244-2025 3.1 various provisions of the Act of 2020 to drive home the aforesaid submission. It is further submitted that Notification dated 17.03.2022 (Annexure P issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority in exercise of powers conferred under Section 12 (3) of the Act of 2020, is of no avail, since the said provision of Section 12 (3) does not empower the Authority under the said Act to levy and recover Environme Division Bench judgment of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, rendered in a bunch of writ petitions, including Writ inter alia, holding that the State Pollution Control Board has law to impose Environmental Compensation, which is alone conferred upon the NGT. 3.2 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by relying upon the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of the the Act of 2020 has no jurisdiction and power to levy and impose Environmental Compensation. 4. Senior Additional Advocate General, while petitioner, has submitted that the held the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. As such, it is contended by learned State counsel that Authority under the Act of 2020 is only executing orders of the NGT, which is obliged to do under Section 28 of 2025 Learned senior counsel, Shri Akshay Bhan, has taken us through various provisions of the Act of 2020 to drive home the aforesaid submission. It is further submitted that Notification dated 17.03.2022 (Annexure P issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority in exercise of powers conferred Section 12 (3) of the Act of 2020, is of no avail, since the said provision of Section 12 (3) does not empower the Authority under the said Act to levy and recover Environmental Compensation. Reliance is further made to Division Bench judgment of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, rendered in a bunch of writ petitions, including Writ , holding that the State Pollution Control Board has law to impose Environmental Compensation, which is alone conferred upon A chronology has been drawn by learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by relying upon the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court, to contend that Authority under the Act of 2020 has no jurisdiction and power to levy and impose Environmental Compensation. Learned counsel for the State of Haryana, Shri Senior Additional Advocate General, while petitioner, has submitted that the NGT, vide its order dated 03.10.2024, has held the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. As such, is contended by learned State counsel that Authority under the Act of 2020 is only executing orders of the NGT, which is obliged to do under Section 28 of -3- Learned senior counsel, Shri Akshay Bhan, has taken us through various provisions of the Act of 2020 to drive home the aforesaid submission. It is further submitted that Notification dated 17.03.2022 (Annexure P- issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority in exercise of powers conferred Section 12 (3) of the Act of 2020, is of no avail, since the said provision of Section 12 (3) does not empower the Authority under the said Act to levy ntal Compensation. Reliance is further made to Division Bench judgment of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, rendered in a bunch of writ petitions, including Writ – C No. 4816 of 2024, , holding that the State Pollution Control Board has no authority in law to impose Environmental Compensation, which is alone conferred upon A chronology has been drawn by learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by relying upon the aforesaid Division Allahabad High Court, to contend that Authority under the Act of 2020 has no jurisdiction and power to levy and impose Learned counsel for the State of Haryana, Shri Lokesh Sinhal, Senior Additional Advocate General, while refuting contention of the NGT, vide its order dated 03.10.2024, has held the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. As such, is contended by learned State counsel that Authority under the Act of 2020 is only executing orders of the NGT, which is obliged to do under Section 28 of Learned senior counsel, Shri Akshay Bhan, has taken us through various provisions of the Act of 2020 to drive home the aforesaid submission. -18), issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority in exercise of powers conferred Section 12 (3) of the Act of 2020, is of no avail, since the said provision of Section 12 (3) does not empower the Authority under the said Act to levy ntal Compensation. Reliance is further made to Division Bench judgment of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, C No. 4816 of 2024, no authority in law to impose Environmental Compensation, which is alone conferred upon A chronology has been drawn by learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by relying upon the aforesaid Division Allahabad High Court, to contend that Authority under the Act of 2020 has no jurisdiction and power to levy and impose Lokesh Sinhal, refuting contention of the NGT, vide its order dated 03.10.2024, has held the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be authorised to seize the illegal tubewell and impose penalty as Environmental Compensation. As such, is contended by learned State counsel that Authority under the Act of 2020 is only executing orders of the NGT, which is obliged to do under Section 28 of NAROTAM DASS 2025.09.03 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-25244-2025 the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which for ready reference and convenience is being re Department of the Government fails to comply with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this Act, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of such failure and liable to be proceeded against for having committed an offence under this Act and punished accordingly : such Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves that the offe exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Department of the been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.” Section 28, it is contended by learned State counsel, obliges every Department of the Government to comply with the decision, order or award of the NGT, failure of which may 5. to subscribe to contention of the petitioner, for the following reasons : (i) 2025 the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which for ready reference and convenience is being re-produced below :- “28. Offences by Government Department Department of the Government fails to comply with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this Act, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of such failure and liable to be proceeded against for having committed an offence under this Act and punished accordingly : Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Department of the Government and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of any officer, other than the Head of the Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.” Section 28, it is contended by learned State counsel, obliges every Department of the Government to comply with the decision, order or award of the NGT, failure of which may attract an offence. We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and are unable to subscribe to contention of the petitioner, for the following reasons : Petitioner Company is a party before the NGT in OA No. 444/2023. Thus, it can very well by the foundational order of the NGT, dated 03.10.2023; -4- the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which for ready reference and “28. Offences by Government Department – (1) Where any Department of the Government fails to comply with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this Act, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of such failure and shall be liable to be proceeded against for having committed an offence under this Act and punished accordingly : Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves nce was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Government and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable on the part of any officer, other than the Head of the Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished Section 28, it is contended by learned State counsel, obliges every Department of the Government to comply with the decision, order or award of the NGT, We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and are unable to subscribe to contention of the petitioner, for the following reasons : Petitioner Company is a party before the NGT in OA No. 444/2023. Thus, it can very well approach the NGT, if aggrieved by the foundational order of the NGT, dated 03.10.2023; the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which for ready reference and (1) Where any Department of the Government fails to comply with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this Act, the Head of the shall be liable to be proceeded against for having committed an offence Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves nce was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Government and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable on the part of any officer, other than the Head of the Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished Section 28, it is contended by learned State counsel, obliges every Department of the Government to comply with the decision, order or award of the NGT, We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and are unable Petitioner Company is a party before the NGT in OA No. approach the NGT, if aggrieved NAROTAM DASS 2025.09.03 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-25244-2025 (ii) (iii) 6. environment and arises out where petitioner is also a party, this Court refrains from entering into merits of the matter and relegates the pe No. 444/2023. 7. August 28, 2025 narotam Whether speakin Whether reportable 2025 Authority under the Act of 2020, is merely executing directions of the NGT, holding the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be entitled to impose penalty as Envir has impelled the Authority under the Act of 2020 to issue impugned order dated 28.04.2025 communication dated 27.06.2025 (Annexure P Petitioner seems to be assailing the consequence arising ou impugned order/communication (Annexures P issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority, but is not adopting the right course of seeking re- passed by NGT on 03.10.2024 in OA No. 444/2023. In view of above and the fact that the matter exclusively relates to environment and arises out OA No. 444/2023, which is pending before NGT, where petitioner is also a party, this Court refrains from entering into merits of the matter and relegates the petitioner to seek its remedy before NGT in OA No. 444/2023. Petition stands disposed of, without commenting upon merits. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -5- Authority under the Act of 2020, is merely executing directions of the NGT, holding the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be entitled to impose penalty as Environmental Compensation, which has impelled the Authority under the Act of 2020 to issue impugned order dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P-19) and communication dated 27.06.2025 (Annexure P-20); and Petitioner seems to be assailing the consequence arising ou impugned order/communication (Annexures P-19 and P issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority, but is not adopting -calling or modification to the order passed by NGT on 03.10.2024 in OA No. 444/2023. In view of above and the fact that the matter exclusively relates to OA No. 444/2023, which is pending before NGT, where petitioner is also a party, this Court refrains from entering into merits of titioner to seek its remedy before NGT in OA Petition stands disposed of, without commenting upon merits. ( SHEEL NAGU ) CHIEF JUSTICE ( SANJIV BERRY ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Authority under the Act of 2020, is merely executing directions of the NGT, holding the Haryana Water Resources Authority to be which has impelled the Authority under the Act of 2020 to issue 19) and Petitioner seems to be assailing the consequence arising out of 19 and P-20) issued by Haryana Water Resources Authority, but is not adopting calling or modification to the order In view of above and the fact that the matter exclusively relates to OA No. 444/2023, which is pending before NGT, where petitioner is also a party, this Court refrains from entering into merits of titioner to seek its remedy before NGT in OA NAROTAM DASS 2025.09.03 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment