Kathikudam Case Before The National Green Tribunal (2015)

1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Application Nos. 305, 309 of 2013 and 149 of 2015 (SZ)
Application No.305 of 2013 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Thressiamma Mathew,
W/o Mathew,
Thelekkat House,
Thaikottam Desom,
Kadukutty, P.O.,
Thrissur District.
..Applicant
AND
1. State of Kerala represented by Secretary,
Department of Environment,
Secretariat,
Thiruvanaanthapuram 695 001.
2. District Collector
Collectorate, Ayyanthole,
Thrissur 680 003.
3. Superintendent of Police (Rural),

Thrissur 680 003.
4. Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Represented by Environmental Engineer,
Regional Office,
Thrissur 680 002.
5. Kadukutty Gramapanchayat,
Kadukutty, P.O.,
Thrissur District 680 315
Represented by its Secretary.
6. Kerala Water Authority,

P.H. Circle, Thrissur 680 001,
Represented by Superintending Engineer.
2
7. Centre for Water Resources

Development and Management,
Kunnamangalam,
Kizhikkode 673 571.
Rep. by its Director.
8. Nitta Gelatin India Limited,

Kathikudam P.O., Koratti,
Thrissur District 680 308. ...Respondents
Application No. 309 of 2013
K.N. Lohithakshan,
S/o. Narayanan,
Kaipuzha Veedu,
Kathikoodam P.O.,
Koratty,
Thrissur District
....Applicant
And
1. State of Kerala
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Environment,
Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram 695 001.
2. District Collector,
Collectorate,
Ayyanthole, Thrissur 680 002.
3. Kerala Pollution Control Board
Represented by Environmental Engineer,
Regional Office,
Thrissur 680 002.
Represented by its Secretary,
Kadukutty P.O.,
Thrissur District 680 002.
5. Kerala Water Authority,

Represented by its Superintending Engineer,
P.H. Circle, Thrissur 680 001.
3

Kathikudam P.O.,
Koratti,
Thrissur District -680 308. ... Respondents
V.R. Babu,
S/o. Raghavan,
Vallathuparambil House Kakkad,
Kathikudam P.O.,
Koratty 680 308. ....Applicant
And
1. The Union of India

Represented by its Secretary to the Government,
Ministry of Environment and Forests & Climate Change,
Paryavaran Bhavan,
New Delhi.
2. The State of Kerala,

Directorate of Environment and Climate Change,
Pallimukku Kannammoola Rd,
Velakudi, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala 695 024.
3. The Kerala Pollution Control Board

Pattom,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala 695 004.
Kallur Vadakkumury Village,
Mukundapuram Taluk, Thrissur,

Kathikudam,
Thrissur , Kerala. ... Respondents
4
Counsel appearing for the Applicant:
Mr. T. Mohan and A. Yogeeswaran for G. Stanley

in Application Nos. 305 and 309 of 2013
Mr. T. Mohan and A. Yogeeswaran for M/s. Neha Miriam Kurian

in Application No. 149 of 2015
Counsel appearing for the Respondents:
Smt. Suvitha A.S for R1 to R3 and R6 in Application No. 305 of

2013
Smt. Suvitha A.S for R1 to R3 and R5 in Application No. 309 of
2013
Smt. Suvitha A.S for R2 in Application No. 149 of 2015
T. Naveen for R4 in Application No. 305 of 2013 and for R3 in

Application Nos. 309 of 2013 and 149 of 2015
Mr. Sheejo Chacho for R5 in Application No. 305 of 2013 and for
R4 in Application Nos. 309 of 2013 and 149 of 2015
Mr. George Zachaiah for R7 in Application No. 305 of 2013
Mr. K. Anand Senior Counsel for M/s. B.S. Krishna Associates,

Koushik N. Sharma and Vishnu for R8 in Application No. 305 of
2013 and for R6 in Application No. 309 of 2013 and for R6 in
5
J U D G E M E NT
PRESENT:
HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE M.S.NAMBIAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HONBLE SHRI P.S. RAO, EXPERT MEMBER
Delivered by Honble Justice M.S.NAMBIAR, Judicial Member
Dated: 27th February, 2017
Whether the Judgement is allowed to be published on the Internet Yes/No
Whether the Judgement is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter Yes/No
Application No.305 of 2013 was filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India before the Honble High Court of
Kerala as Writ Petition No.15010 of 2012. The prayer was to
issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1
to 7 to ensure that there is zero liquid discharge to the
Chalakudy river by the 8th respondent, Nitta Gelatin India
Limited and to command respondent No.4, Kerala State
Pollution Control Board not to renew the Consent granted to
respondent No.8 without complying with the circular dated
09.08.2004 issued earlier regarding the siting parameters and
also for a direction to respondent No.7, Centre for Water

6
Resources Development and Management, Kozhikkode to
conduct a detailed study regarding the discharge of effluents by
respondent No.8 to the Chalakudy river and to ensure that the
functioning of respondent No.8 does not cause any
environment hazards to the residents of the locality. That Writ
Petition was filed by the applicant as Public Interest Litigation
claiming to be an affected person residing in the
neighbourhood of the industry of respondent No.8.
The Pleadings:
2. Application No.309 of 2013 was also filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India before the Honble High Court
of Kerala as Writ Petition No.26653 of 2012. That Writ Petition
was filed by the applicant as Public Interest Litigation with the
prayers to issue a writ of mandamus directing Nitta Gelatin
India Limited, respondent No.6 herein, the same respondent
No.8 in Application No.305 of 2013, to complete the pollution
control measures as per the Government Order dated
03.11.2011, at any rate by 01.01.2013 and also for a direction
to the 3rd extend the time allowed beyond 01.01.2013 and also
to direct respondent No.3 to depute an expert committee to

7
supervise the movement of ETP Sludge from the company to
distant places and to report whether it is nutrisoil and further
direction to respondent No.6 not to commission the biogas
plant without necessary sanction from the Panchayat and also
to direct respondent No.6 to recycle the water taken from the
Chalakkudy river within the company itself and to remove the
huge pipes laid by the company to drain water back to the river
and also to direct the respondent No.3 not allow the
respondent No.6 company to make any fresh construction of
the effluent pipeline under the guise of repair and
maintenance. The applicant also claims to be an affected
resident of the locality.
3. While these writ petitions were pending before the
Honble High Court of Kerala, by the order dated 27.08.2013,
following the decision of the Honble Supreme Court of India in
Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog Sangathan & Others Vs.
Union of India & Others [(2012)8 SCC 326], the writ petitions
were directed to be transferred to National Green Tribunal,
Southern Bench, Chennai. On receipt of the records the writ

8
petitions were numbered as Application Nos. 305 and 309 of
2013 respectively.
4. Application No. 149 of 2015 was filed by a resident of
neighbourhood of the company under Section 14 of the
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with the prayers to direct
respondent No. 5, Nitta Gelatin India Limited to stop operating
at the present site since it is a Red Category industry and is
situated in the midst of ecologically sensitive area, in close
proximity to residential areas and banks of the Chalakkudy
River and for a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 4, Ministry
Environment and Forests & Climate Change (MoEF & CC), State
of Kerala, Kerala State Pollution Control Board and Kadukutty
Grama Panchayat to make proper and adequate studies and
take necessary action to remediate the damage caused by the
pollution and to restore the area.
5. M/s. Nitta Gelatin India Limited (Ossein Division) was
established in 1979, at Kathikudam Village, Kadikutty
Panchayat in Chalakuddy of Thrissur District. The industry was
established in a plot of about 32 acres. The unit is
manufacturing Ossein, Limed Ossein, Di-Calcium Phosphate

9
(DCP), Meat meal and Sterilized bone meal. The raw materials
used are crushed bones, Hydrochloric acid (HCl) and Hydrated
Lime. The crushed bones are purchased from local slaughter
houses and also from different parts of the country including
Aligarh etc., The HCl is mainly purchased from M/s. Travancore
Cochin Chemicals Limited, Kochi and M/s. Chemplast Sanmar,
Mettur, Tamil Nadu. The manufacturing process is divided into
three major parts namely Pre-treatment of Crushed Bone,
Acidulation and Di Calcium Phosphate Plant.
6. In the Pre-treatment, Crushed Bone which is the raw
material, is fed into a hopper through of screw and belt
conveyors. The sinews and bone meal are separated using
blower and rotary screen. From there, crushed bone is
transferred to rotary wash for washing. Grease and bone meal
are separated during washing. After, Pre-treatment, Crushed
Bone is transferred to the acid bath for further processing. The
wash water from Pre-treatment process is sent to Effluent
Treatment Plant (ETP) through open drain as organic waste
water.
10
7. In the Acidulation process, crushed bone after pre-
treatment is transferred to acid path and treated with 4%
concentrated HCL for about 5-7 days to convert bone into a
product called Ossein. After complete reaction, from crushed
bone to Ossein, the Ossein is taken into paddle washer for
washing and to remove free acid and impurities. Neutralization
of Ossein is also done at paddle washer by adding hydrated
lime. After the neutralization the Ossein is dried and packed in
PP bags and exported to Nitta Gelatin India Limited Company.
For gelatin production, wet Ossein is pumped to liming plant,
where it is subjected to lime treatment for 35-45 days and
treated lime as a whole in wet condition is transported to M/s.
Nitta Gelatin Unit located in Kakkanad, Kochi for gelatine
manufacturing. The Mono-calcium phosphate solution
generated during acidulation is pumped to Di-calcium
Phosphate (DCP) plant for manufacturing of Di-calcium
phosphate. The waste water from paddle washer is sent to ETP
in open drain as organic wastewater. The hot air for Ossein
drier is met through the fire wood boiler attached to stack of
30m height.
11
8. Di-calcium Phosphate (DCP) plant is where the mono
calcium phosphate generated from acidulation process is
pumped and treated with hydrated lime solution for conversion
of Mono calcium phosphate to Di Calcium Phosphate. The
solution is allowed for settling to obtain the DCP slurry. DCP
slurry is filtered using Rotary Drum Vacuum filter, dried in
vacuum drier and packed and stored in closed storage yard.
The filtrate and supernatant generated during the process is
sent to ETP through open drain as inorganic waste water.
9. The separated sinews and bone meal during crushed
bone pre-treatment is converted into a product named meat
meal in two processes i.e., dry process and wet process. The
sinews and bone meal separated from crushed bone which is in
dry form are packed and sold to local farmers as meat meal.
The bone meal separated during crushed bone washing is
cooked in a cooker with a steam and dried and finally sold to
farmers as sterilized bone meal as poultry feed.
10. The main source of water to the unit is Chalakudy
river. The waste water generated in the unit is categorized as
process waste water and domestic wastewater. The wash

12
water from pre-treatment of Crushed Bone, Wash water from
Ossein washing, Effluent from liming plant, Supernatant from
DCP precipitation and Filtrate from DCP filtration are the
sources of process waste water. The process waste water
generated in the unit is segregated into two streams namely
organic stream and inorganic stream. Organic stream includes
wash water from pre-treatment of Crushed Bone, Wash water
from Ossein washing, Effluent from liming plant, boiler blow
down, floor washing and storm water. Inorganic stream
consists of Supernatant from DCP precipitation and Filtrate
from DCP filtration. The organic waste water generated from
Ossein plant is transferred into ETP and after removal of
grease, the overflow of effluent is collected in effluent collection
tank and pumped to flash mixer where lime dosing is done to
neutralize the effluent followed by buffer tank. From the flash
mixer the effluent is pumped to anaerobic digester for
degradation of organic compounds in anaerobic condition. The
biogas generated during the oxidation process is collected in
biogas holder and used as a fuel for boiler. The overflow from
anaerobic digester is collected in Lamella Clarifier for
settlement of solid particles. The overflow of lamella clarifier is

13
pumped to flash mixer flowed by Flocculator, primary clarifier,
Diffused Air Flocculator (DAF). The effluent from DAF is mixed
along with inorganic effluent and the mixture is sent to aeration
tank for further treatment. The sludge from primary clarifier is
taken into thickener followed by Rotary Vacuum Drier, filter
press and sludge drier. The final sludge is collected and
packed in polythene bags and sent to Treatment, Storage and
Disposal Facility (TSDF) at Kochi. The supernatant from DCP
precipitation and filtrate from DCP filtration is taken into DCP
effluent collection in separate channel and collected in DCP
effluent collection tank. The water from effluent collection tank
is pumped to flash mixer followed by Flocculator, primary
clarifier and Diffused Air Flocculator(DAF). The treated effluent
from DAF-1 is pumped to aeration tank along with the treated
effluent from DAF-2 for further treatment. The sludge from
primary clarifier is taken into thickener followed by Rotary
Vacuum Drier, filter press and sludge drier. The final sludge is
collected and packed in polythene bag and sent to Treatment
Storage and Disposal Facility at Kochi. In the secondary and
tertiary treatment, the effluent from Diffused Air Flocculators
are pumped to aeration tank for further oxidation. The effluent

14
after aeration is pumped to secondary clarifier followed by flash
mixer, flocculator, tertiary clarifier, sand filter and delay Pond.
The effluent from delay pond is diluted with the back wash
water of sand filter and finally disposed into the Chalakudy
river.
11. The case of all the applicants is that because of the
negligence of the respondent company, the pipes and the
manholes are broken and leaking and the toxic materials are
allowed to the neighbourhood resulting in environmental
degradation of the entire area apart from contamination of
drinking water in the wells. It is alleged that the company
takes in about 2 crore litres of fresh water from Chalakudy
river every day and effluents, approximately 80 tonnes are
discharged to the Chalakudy river through huge tunnel like
pipes installed by the company to the middle portion of the
river and the effluent contains decomposed particles animal
bones, marrow and flsh, hydraulic acid and other hazardous
wastes.
12. The applicant in Application No.305 of 2013 would
allege that when these facts are brought to the notice, all the
15
statutory authorities and expert agencies who had conducted
study of the effluent discharge system of the company have
unanimously found that the functioning of the company is
causing environmental disaster in the locality. The District
Collector, Pollution Control Board as well as Panchayat had
time and again prohibited the functioning of the industry. But
because of external pressures respondent No.1, State of Kerala
is taking a lethargic attitude and as a result the ecological
problem continued. The residents of the locality including the
applicant formed an action council by name Nitta Gelatin India
Limited Action Council which has been spearheading for
campaigning for the stoppage of environmental hazards caused
by the company.
13. As per the report of the Kerala State Pollution Control
Board dated 21.02.2012, the effluent discharged by the
company shows astronomical increase in the level of pollutants.
Based on the report of the Pollution Control Board,
Environmental Engineer has issued a show cause notice on
23.2.2012 to the company. It is alleged that still without any
positive action by the company, the Pollution Control Board is

16
taking steps to renew the Consent under the Water (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act 1981.
14. The report prepared by the Kerala State Pollution
Control Board (KSPCB) shows that though the tolerance limit of
Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) is 30 mg/L, it is 133333
times more than the tolerance limit. Though maximum
tolerance limit of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) is 250, it is
83,80,000 i.e. 33, 555 times more than the tolerance limit.
The tolerance limit of suspended solids is 100 whereas it is
more than 10,000 times the tolerance limit. The Ammonical
nitrogen in 50 mg/L is more than three times the tolerance
limit. The dissolved phosphate tolerance limit is 5/mg/1 but it
is at a quantity of 12,000 i.e. 2400 times more than the
tolerance limit.
15. A circular dated 09.08.2004 was issued by the KSPCB
regarding the siting parameters for the industries. The
minimum distance from the residential houses as regards red
category large industries is 100 metres. The Consent shows
that the company is a large red category industry. Therefore,

17
it should be placed outside 100 metres from the nearest
residential house. There are at least 46 residential houses
situated within a distance of 100 metres radius from the
industrial unit. The report submitted by the Environmental
Engineer also reveals that foul smell is being transmitted from
the company to the nearby houses and that there is foul odour
in the treated effluent discharged from the company to the
Chalakudy river. Inspite of repeated directions, the company is
not taking any positive action to stop the pollution being
caused. Direction was issued by the KSPCB on the illegal
discharge of effluent to the Chalakudy river, construction of
biogas plant in the industrial unit causing environmental
problem. At the intervention of the State Government, the
KSPCB had granted permission for functioning of the unit by
order dated 13.12.2011. On the basis of the public protest
the District Collector sent a letter to the State Government on
06.12.2012. The report shows that the waste waster is being
discharged into the river causing serious water pollution. There
are residues of sludge leaked from the pipe carrying waste to
the river emitting foul smell is also found in the report.

18
16. The Kadukutty Gramapanchayat has also, responding
to the public protest, submitted a detailed letter to the
Environmental Engineer, Pollution Control Board on 13.06.2012
disclosing that the application for renewal of consent should not
be allowed. The Panchayat also reported that the facts
mentioned in the application for licence submitted by the 8th
respondent was rejected by the Panchayat due to the serious
environmental hazards.
17. The Kerala Water Authority issued a letter dated
28.11.2011 to the District Collector stating that the treatment
of waste water by respondent No.8 is not adequate and the
effluent discharged has high foul smell. It was also reported
that excessive acidity was found because of the effluent
discharged into the river near pump house of the Kerala Water
Authority. It is the Kerala Water Authority which is providing
drinking water from the Chalakudy river to the residents of the
Mukundapuram Taluk which is one of the largest Taluks in
Kerala. The Environmental Engineer of the KSPCB also filed a
report before the Local Self Government Institutions that there
is no proper treatment made to the waste water, which is

19
directly pumped to the Chalakudy river which is causing
pollution and it directly affects the right to life of the residents
in the locality.
18. Contending that the Honble Supreme Court in
Tirupur Dying Factory Owners Association case directed that
Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) of trade effluents has to be
achieved, the applicant contended that the industry is to be
directed to achieve ZLD and not to discharge any trade effluent
into the Chalakudy river. On these allegations the applicant in
Application No.305 of 2013 has sought the reliefs.
19. The applicant in Application No.309 of 2013 had
contended that all the statutory authorities and expert agencies
who had conducted study of the effluent discharge system of
the company unanimously found that the manner of operating
of the company is causing an environmental disaster in the
locality. The residents of the locality have formed an action
council, NGIL Action council which is striving for the stoppage
of environmental hazards caused by the company. The
Panchayat did not renew the licence since 2009, the company
is functioning only on the strength of the orders of the Honble

20
High Court. On the complaints from the local public, the
Government ordered an enquiry by an expert committee
headed by the Head of the Department of Chemical
Engineering, Government Engineering College, Thrissur. Based
on the report of the expert committee, the Government issued
orders on 03.11.2011 directing immediate action by the
company and the concerned departments. The company was
directed to implement the pollution control measures by the
Panchayat. By order dated 03.11.2011 the Panchayat directed
the shutting down of the entire industry due to pollution. At
the instance of the State Government, the Pollution Control
Board had to permit the functioning of the company.
20. On the basis of the public sentiment, the District
Collector issued a letter to the State Government and pointed
out that the untreated effluent is being discharged into the
river causing water pollution. Instead of fulfilling the
suggestions given in the Government order dated 03.11.2011,
the company is misguiding the authorities by sending a
periodical status report based on the action plan which was
designed by the company and submitted in the meeting held

21
by the Chief Minister on 07.12.2011. The Pollution Control
Board relying on the misleading reports by order dated
30.06.2012 renewed the Consent to Operate. Consent was
also given for setting up bio gas plants for processing the
sludge formed in the company as a waste product. The waste
product sludge is an industrial waste and not a bio waste. As
far as the company is concerned, the bio gas plant is only a
stocking place for the enormous quantity of sludge produced by
the company every day. The sludge so accumulated day by
day will make horrible odour nuisance and suffocation to people
and the same spreads to far away places even kilometres
distance. Thus the company is to be restrained from
commissioning the so called bio gas plant and storing the
sludge therein.
21. As sludge has been increased from 750 tonnes in a
year to 18000 tonnes in a year, it is clear that the company
has increased its production and the waste sludge called sludge
contains heavy metals like Lead, Nickel, Cadmium and
Chromium which are highly harmful to human beings and may
cause dreadful diseases like cancer, cardiac and kidney

22
problems. As they find it difficult to dispose of the sludge in
faraway places, the company is conveniently discharging the
same into Chalakudy river during night time. The polluted
water is reaching lakhs of people through drinking water
projects. Though, the Pollution Control Board directed that the
sludge in the semi solid form shall not be transported outside
the company, it is being violated. The permission granted for
the production of sludge is only 750 tonnes in a year. As per
the Consent, even if it is transported outside in the form of
Nutrisoil, the quantity cannot exceed 750 tonnes in a year.
The prohibition of sludge being taken outside the company
premises should be strictly made applicable also to the
discharge of sludge into Chalakudy river. The huge pipes
having a diameter of 2 ft. laid by the company to drain
waste water into the river is blocking the natural drainage
channels thereby causing water stagnation in the area which
in turn has adversely affected the yield expected by the
agriculturists including the applicant. The company could
recycle the water inside the company itself without pumping it
back into the river through pipes. As there is also direction to
the company to stop the sale of sludge to outside parties, the

23
biogas plant is also to be stopped. The applicant in Application
No. 309 of 2019 has sought the reliefs on these allegations.
22. The applicant in Application No.149 of 2015 has also
reiterated the same allegations raised by the other applicants
and also contended that the company is producing about 100
tonnes of toxic sludge which is being generated every day and
the company has no proper method of disposal of the sludge
generated. The company has dug pits on their premises,
dumped the sludge without any lining whatsoever and have
sealed it using cement/ concrete and the sludge has been
entering the ground water and making the land unsuitable for
agriculture and the water in the wells not potable. The
untreated effluents from the company are being discharged
into the Chalakudy river daily. On enquiry under Right to
Information Act, 2005, it was found that the company is
operating based on the letter received from the Pollution
Control Board. The consent period expired on 30.06.2015 and
such operation from 30.06.2015 is illegal and without valid
consent. The company is also not having a valid NOC from the
Grama Panchayat. The company also laid a discharge pipe

24
through the land of an adjacent plot. It was laid without
permission. The company is also setting up a biogas plant to
treat the chemical sludge that is being generated by the
company. On 09.11.2011, a biogas plant installed by them
earlier get burst causing injury to persons. Only chemical
sludge was being put into the plant. This resulted in build-up
of poisonous gases and ultimately explosion. The company had
shown scant regard to the safety and security of the local
population. On these allegations, the applicant in Application
No.149 of 2015 has also sought the reliefs.
23. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board herein
referred to as KSPCB, is the respondent No.4 in Application
No.305 of 2013 and respondent No.3 in Application No.309 of
2013 and respondent No.3 in Application No.149 of 2015,
resisted the applications by contending that respondent No.8
Nitta Gelatin India Limited company has been functioning at
Kathikudam since 1979 and 8th respondent company is
promoted by Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation
in collaboration with Nitta Gelatin Inc, Japan for functioning of
the company. The company pumps water from the Chalakudy

25
river and discharges after effluent treatment to the river itself
through the discharge pipe from the company to the river. An
action council NGIL (formally KCPL) was formed with Jayan
Pattah as Chairman and Appu Kuttippat as General Convenor in
March 2008. They demanded to put an end to the polluting
activities of NGIL with a view to protecting the health of the
public as the industry polluting the water and water resources.
The Council alleged that the company is discharging the sludge
without treating the same and that would contaminate the
water and water resources which would directly affect the
health of the people as well as destruct the rare species and
fishes in the river. In some occasions, the agitators turned to
violence which developed into serious law and order issue in
that area. The Koratty Police Station has taken action and 45
cases were registered from 2008 to 2015 and some were
convicted, some were acquitted, some are pending and some
are undetected.
24. The Action Council also declared that they would
forcefully remove the discharge pipe erected from the effluent
treatment plant to the Chalakudy river and started various

26
campaigns for the propaganda and strengthening of agitation.
As part of that a mass campaign through social media was
organised. The District Collector convened an all party meeting
including the officials on 29.06.2013 in which an expert
committee to study the pollution was constituted and directed
to submit the report before 21.07.2013. The action counsel
announced that they will remove the discharge pipes on
21.07.2013 and proceeded with their agitation. The
Government constituted 8 member technical committee by
order G.O (RT) No. 129/2011/Industries dated 27.01.2011 and
G.O. (RT) No. 249/2011/Industries dated 21.02.2011 with Dr.
Lakshmikutty, Head of the Department of Chemical
Engineering, Government Engineering College, Thrissur as
chairperson for studying and reporting on the pollution caused
by Nitta Gelatin Company and to suggest remedial measures.
The expert committee after detailed study submitted report
before the Government. The Government vide order No.
1376/2011/Industries dated 03.11.2011 accepted the report
and directed the company to implement the recommendations
of the committee. The Chief Minister of Kerala convened a
meeting on 07.12.2011 with Ministers, MLAs and officials from

27
various Government departments also attended the meeting
along with the action council members, Panchayat members
and the Company Officials. The company submitted the time
based action plan which was accepted by the Government. In
addition to 13 points already suggested by the expert
committee, 3 more points were added by the Government for
compliance in the meeting. Further, 13 member monitoring
committee was also constituted to monitor the implementation
of the 16 point programme.
25. By Judgement dated 03.12.2013 in W.P.(C) No.15795
of 2013, the Honble High Court of Kerala directed NEERI
(National Environmental Engineering Research Institute,
Nagpur) to conduct a detailed study into the pollution staus
with respect to the Air, Water and Solid Waste generated from
NGIL and the adequacy and efficacy of the pollution control
measures installed by the company. The NEERI was also
directed to submit report to the company, Pollution Control
Board and to the District Collector with its recommendations
and also specifying the time required for the implementation of
the recommendations. The NGIL moved Writ Petition before

28
the Honble High Court in W.P.No.15795 of 2013 for direction
to the District Police Chief, Thrissur Rural, Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Chalakudy, Circle Inspector of Police,
Chalakudy, and Sub Inspector of Police, Koratty to take
necessary steps to avert any law and order situation which
may arise as declared by the Action Council and to prevent the
Action Council, their men, associates and sympathizers from
causing destruction of the pipelines or any other properties and
afford adequate, effective and timely protection to preserve
and maintain law and order situation. On 21.06.2013 the
Honble High Court directed the respondents to ensure that
none of the installations of the petitioners company is put to
any harm and adequate action will be taken to ensure such
protection. Based on the action and adequate steps were
taken. The agitators started their agitation on 21.07.2013,
and they were blocked when they proceeded to remove the
discharge pipeline and they returned to the front gate of the
company and started the siege. The agitation was moving
peacefully and when the women and children demonstrators
were removed from the scene, one group strongly opposed the
move and pelted stones and worsened the situation, following

29
which the Executive Magistrate who was present there ordered
to remove the agitators using force which resulted in lathi
charge. About 26 Police personnel got injured and some of
the agitators were also injured. A crime case as Cr.1104 of
2013 under Sections 143, 147, 148, 188, 283, 341, 332 r/w
149 IPC was registered and the Police has taken up
investigation.
26. As directed by the District Collector, the company
was closed for some days. Meeting was convened in the
Chambers of the Honble Chief Minister and thereafter the
company started its functioning. The agitators then started
blocking the vehicles carrying the raw materials and sludge
from the company. The company already obtained an order in
the year 2010 for transportation of the sludge. The company
filed I.A.No.10984 of 2012 in W.P.(C) No.15795 of 2013 to
afford timely and effective police protection to bring the raw
materials and to have free ingress and egress of the employees
of the company. On 16.8.2013 the Honble High Court passed
an order clarifying that the order dated 21.06.2013 shall be
used only for the protection of the installations of the petitioner

30
and not for suppressing any peaceful agitation by the local
people. Police is proving necessary Police Protection to the
company, its employees, its installations and transporting of
raw materials etc. On 03.12.2013, W.P.No.15795 of 2013
was disposed by the Honble High Court directing the
respondents to afford adequate and effective Police protection
to the company and to maintain law and order and for smooth
functioning of the company and also directed to ensure that the
NGIL Action Council and its sympathisers shall not cause any
obstruction to the functioning of the company or damage to its
installations, pipes and other properties.
27. On 09.11.2011 the Bio as tank of the company
bursted and due to the high foul smell the complainant and the
inmates of the residences and the surroundings of the company
were hospitalised. Crime No.1260 of 2011 was registered and
charge sheet has been submitted for the offences under
Sections 278, 336, 285 IPC against the NGIL company before
the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy. So also
Crime No.1435 of 2013 under Section 3(2) of PDPP Act 1984,
Crime No.1588 of 2014 under Sections 269, 270, 336 IPC and
31
49 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
were registered against the company and later after completing
investigation the charge sheets were laid before the Judicial
First Class Magistrate. As far as the Pollution Control Board is
concerned, it is doing all that is required to do under law.
Further, it is duty bound to comply with the directions of the
Honble High Court.
28. Kadukutty Grama Panchayat who is respondent No.5
in Application No.305 of 2013 and respondent No.4 in
Application No.309 of 2013 and Application No.149 of 2015
filed the reply contending that the company is functioning
without Panchayat license since 2011. The applications for
renewal of licenses for the year 2011 to 2016 were rejected by
the Panchayat Committee as there has been wilful default by
the company in carrying out the directions of the Panchayat to
abate the nuisance and pollution. The abatement of nuisance
is found impracticable in view of repeated incidents of leakage
of discharge of pipeline, explosion of biogas plant and pollution
caused to Chalakudy river. The residue of sludge leaked from
the pipeline carrying waste water into the river is emitting

32
strong stench and foul water is spread atleast within radius of 1
km of the industrial premises. The Local Self Government
Department has issued a Circular bearing No.
66562/RC3/12/LSGD directing the local bodies to insist for
sanitation certificate issued by Health Inspectors after
conducting site inspection for renewal of license or for fresh
grant. The application filed by the company for issuance of
sanitation certificate was rejected by the Health Inspector.
Thereafter, the Panchayat Committee considered the
application for license for renewal for the period 2015-2016
which was unanimously rejected by the Panchayat Committee
on 31.03.2015. The company is listed under large Red
Category Industries and its operations are hazardous. The
breaking of discharge pipe, biogas plant explosion and
spreading of sludge and slurry in the paddy fields and thereby
hazardous materials being moved to the water sources. Due to
discharge of effluent on 29.10.2010 causing pollution in the
whole locality, a law and order problem was created. On
getting the information about it, the Tahsildar reached at the
spot and communicated to the Additional District Magistrate
who directed to stop the functioning of the company. That

33
order was challenged before the Honble High Court in W.P.(C)
No.1307 of 2011. The raw materials used by the company are
crushed bone of slaughtered animals, hydrochloric acid,
hydrated lime etc., The effluent discharged by the company is
causing foul smell in the ambient air around atleast 1 km of the
industrial premises. The company is shirking its responsibility
and the accumulated sludge is creating horrible odour
nuisance and suffocation to the people of the locality. The
company has multiplied its production and machines were
installed and buildings were constructed without obtaining
permissions from the Panchayat. Local residents have filed
W.P.(C) No.6092 of 2013 alleging that company is functioning
in a manner causing acute nuisance and pollution to the
residents of the locality. Alleging unauthorized installations
and building constructions, representations were filed before
the Panchayat by local residents and also before the Honble
High Court. The Honble High Court directed the Panchayat to
consider the grievance of the petitioners therein by considering
and disposing the representation and pass appropriate orders
thereon. The Secretary on inspection found that buildings
having an area of about 33000 square feet are found

34
constructed without building permit and machines were
installed to the extent of 4593 HP as against the sanction
granted for 120 HP machinery installation. The Panchayat,
after hearing all concerned, directed the company to remove
machinery installed without permission and to demolish the
unauthorised buildings constructed by the company. That
order was challenged before the Tribunal for Local Self
Government Institutions in Appeal No.810 of 2013 and order
passed by the Panchayat is found to be one in the nature of a
final order and Panchayat was directed to initiate fresh
proceedings in compliance with Section 235W of the Kerala
Panchayat Raj Act. Thereafter, fresh proceedings were
initiated and a provisional and a final order was passed in
accordance with law. The company filed O.S.No.511 of 2014
before the Munsif Court, Chalakudy praying for a decree of
permanent injunction against the respondents and their men
from doing acts illegally to demolish the buildings and
machinery. The Munsif Court passed an order restraining the
respondents and their men from demolishing the buildings.
The sludge and slurry are seen on the surface of river water
near the manhole of the discharge pipe. The dark red colour of
35
the water is a sufficient indicator of pollution of river water. As
a result the polluted water is being pumped to the drinking
water tanks existing near to the effluent outlet causing threat
and danger to the public. The company is not having a proper
waste management system for the disposal of hazardous waste
and dangerous chemical waste. There are 32 residential
houses situated within a radius of 100 meters from the
company and certain houses are even situated within 80
metres from the location of the company. Therefore,
considering the larger public interest, license was not renewed.
No effective steps appear to have been taken to stop the grave
public nuisance caused by the company. The closure order was
issued by the Pollution Control Board, later the closure order
was withdrawn at the instance of the Government. It is also
stated that the company shall ensure that the river water is not
polluted.
29. Respondent No.6, Kerala Water Authority filed the
reply contending that Kerala Water Authority was one of the
Expert Committee Members out of 8 appointed by the State
Government to study the pollution created by the Nitta Gelatin.

36
Water Authority was entrusted to test the water quality of
nearby wells and rivers at various localities of water samples
during the month of April 2011. The quality control wing,
Thrissur of the Water Authority collected 11 water samples
and tested physical, chemical and pesticides and heavy metal
constituents in their Regional Laboratory at Ernakulam. Out of
the 11 samples, 6 samples are well water samples collected
nearby the company and the rest are river water samples
collected from nearby locations upstream and downstream. pH
value found is less than 6.5 which is slightly acidic. The remedy
is adding lime to increase the pH value to make it within the
acceptable limit. As per the order of Industries Department
dated 03.11.2011, direction was issued to carry out 13
numbers of things by the company and other departmental
agencies for proper functioning of the company. In the meeting
conducted by Honble Chief Minister with Industry Minister and
all the stake holders on 07.12.2011, to resolve the issue arising
out of the bursting of the Biogas plant of the company, the
company agreed to carry out the rectification works and all the
other concerned departments especially the Pollution Control
Board were directed to have close monitoring of the effluent

37
discharge and also to form a Monitoring Committee including
local body representative, Trade union representative,
Management, Health Department etc., There should be a close
monitoring of the effluent discharge and working of the
company by the respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 is
frequently monitoring the physical, chemical and bacteriological
parameters of water supply scheme maintained by the Water
Authority through Quality Control Wing.
30. Reply affidavit was filed by Respondent No. 7, the
Centre for Water Resources Development and Management
(CWRDM) Kozhikode contending that it has nothing to do with
the company and respondent No. 7, CWRDM is not an authority
constituted by the Government to ensure quality of drinking
water for the public. Respondent No.7 being a 100% grant-in-
aid autonomous institution, has no statutory duty to conduct
any study, other than required as per the objectives fixed for
the institution. Therefore, the application as against the
respondent is to be dismissed.
31. Respondent No.4, Kerala State Pollution Control
Board (KSPCB) who is the respondent No.3 in Application Nos.

38
309 of 2013 and 149 of 2015 filed the reply contending that
m/s. Nitta Gelatin India Limited was formerly known as Kerala
Chemicals and Proteins Ltd has been functioning at Kathikudam
in the Kadukutty Grama Panchayat since 1979. The company is
engaged in the production of 13.3 t/d of ossein, 8.3 t/d of
limed ossein, 40.5 t/d of Di calcium phosphate, 3 t/d of meat
meal, 2 t/d of sterilized bone meal and 6.87 t/d of compost
using 74 t/d of crushed bone, 81.40 t/d of 4% hydrochloric acid
and 15 t/d hydrated lime as raw materials. Ossein is produced
by leaching of crushed bone with 4% Hydrochloric acid. After
leaching it is washed with water to remove the free acid
present. A part of this is dried and packed. The remaining
portion is leached with lime solution to produce limed ossein.
Mono calcium phosphate dissolved in acid during processing of
bone is then neutralised with lime to precipitate Di-calcium
phosphate. This Di-calcium phosphate slurry is filtered, dried
and packed. The effluent from the unit is a combination of
effluents from ossein plant, liming plant and Di-calcium
phosphate plant. From June 1997 onwards the Pollution Control
Board had received several complaints from local residences
against the company for causing water pollution and foul smell.
39
An Action Council was formed by the local people who
submitted complaints against water pollution as well as odour
nuisance due to functioning of the company from 2012
onwards. Based on the complaints filed by the Action Council,
the Government appointed an Expert Committee to study and
report the alleged pollution from the company. As per the
order issued in G.O. (RT) No. 129/2011/Industries dated
27.01.2011 Government appointed 8 member Expert
Committee headed by Dr.Lakshmikutty, Head of the
Department of Chemical Engineering, Government Engineering
College, Thrissur. The Expert Committee submitted a report
dated 03.11.2011 which was accepted by the government and
the Government directed the company to implement the 13
recommendations by order dated 03.11.2011 in G.O. (RT) No.
1376/2011/1D. The recommendations were:
1. Reduce water consumption by using

appropriate technology and water recycling
method.
2. Construction of new biogas plant.
3. Improve the efficiency of DCP bag filters by
installing additional bag filters.
4. Stoppage of semi-dried solid waste
transportation to outside.
40
5. Execution of the directives from the PCB and

complete adherence to pollution control norms.
6. Prevention of order from the company using
modern technology.
7. Take sincere steps for the benefit and
upbringing of local people and there by achieve
their goodwill.
8. Formation of green belt along the company
boundary.
9. Prevention of odour related pollution in the
area.
10. Consider continuous monitoring system for
assessing the smell in the surrounding.
11. Formation of monitoring committee
comprising local body members, trade union
members, management and health
department.
12. Take steps to remove the apprehensions
regarding outlet water discharge system.
13. Cleaning of Chalakudy river to remove the
sediments from the river bed.
32. On 01.11.2011, new biogas plant which was under
trial run, collapsed and the sludge partially spilled over the
surroundings. Then the company was directed to be closed on
03.11.2011. The Chief Minister of Kerala convened a meeting
on 7.12.2011 to discuss the issues of the company in the
presence of local MLA, Local body Authorities, Company
Authorities, NGIL Action Council members and other

41
Government Departments. It was decided to strictly
implement the 13 recommendations given by the Expert
Committee and as approved by the Government. In addition to
the above 13 recommendations, 3 more items were included
in this meeting as follows:
1. Provide delay pond for treated effluent.

2. Provide bag filters to reduce suspended
matter.
3. Enclose the crushed bone unloading area for
reducing the smell.
33. Pursuant to the decision, the closure order was
revoked with effect from 13.12.2011. Action Plan was
submitted by the company to implement the aforesaid 16
recommendations which was approved by the Pollution Control
Board. The District Office of the Kerala State Pollution Control
Board, Thrissur closely monitored the progress in
implementing the Action Plan and submitted monthly report to
Head office of the Board. The company implemented all the
recommendations within the stipulated time as per the Action
Plan except the cleaning of Chalakudy River. The Chairman of
the Board also reviewed the progress in implementing the

42
Action Plan on a quarterly basis and submitted report to the
Government. The Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) consisting of
equalisation tank, coagulation tank, flocculation tank, primary
clarifier, aeration tank, secondary clarifier, tertiary clarifier,
pressures and filter, delay pond, rotary vacuum filter and filter
presses were found to be working continuously and no water is
let into the river without treatment. The company installed 4
bag filters for the DCP plant and chimney of hot air generators
having a height of 30 m from ground level to control
particulate matter emission. The company also provided a bio
filter for the meat meal plant and crushed bone charging area
for reducing odour problem. The stack monitoring and ambient
air quality monitoring were conducted in the company
premises on 27.11.2012 and the concentration of particulate
matter and suspended particulate matter were within the
parameters. The Consent to Operate granted to the company
on 30.06.2012 was valid upto 30.06.2013. It was later
renewed upto 30.06.2015 on 20.06.2013 Consent to Operate
was granted only after conducting the statutory enquiry and
after assessing the pollution control measures already
provided and additional measures proposed by the company.

43
As per condition no.3.11, the Board permitted the company to
discharge the treated effluent into Chalakudy river after
complying with the effluent standards specified in condition
no.3.1 of Consent to Operate. It is upto the company to make
arrangements and the safety measures to be adopted while
discharging the treated effluent through pipeline from the
company to Chalakudy river. The Board is particular in
ensuring the quantity and quality of the treated effluent
discharged into the river.
34. The Circular dated 09.08.2004 stipulated siting
criteria for industries other than stone crusher. The siting
criteria stipulated minimum distance to be kept between the
industry to nearest residence and to nearest educational
institutions / court / public offices / hospital / place of worship
/ community hall and similar establishments. Also the siting
criteria do not specify any minimum distance from the industry
to any stream, wells and other water bodies. The siting criteria
came into force with effect from 09.08.2004, whereas
company was established earlier i.e. in 1979. Therefore, the

44
siting parameters cannot be applied to the company in
question.
35. By order dated 03.12.2013, the Honble High Court
of Kerala in WP(c) No. 15795 of 2013 directed the CSIR
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute
(NEERI), Nagpur to conduct a detailed study into the
environmental pollution status with respect to air, water and
solid waste from the ossein division of NGIL including the
adequacy and efficacy assessment of the pollution control
facilities installed. NEERI submitted a detailed report in May
2014, to the Board. The Board considered the report in detail
and directed the company to implement the recommendations
of NEERI. On 04.01.2015 and 15.01.2015 the Board along
with officials of NEERI and District Collectorate inspected the
company for assessing the status of implementation of the
recommendations of NEERI. During the joint inspection it was
found that the company has started implementing the
recommendations in a time bond manner to the satisfaction of
the Board. Samples of effluents from the company and water
from Chalakudy river were collected for analysis. On

45
implementing all the recommendations of NEERI, the Board
expected that the pollution problems and nuisance to the
public will be reduced.
36. Additional reply was filed by respondent No.4 on
11.03.2016 stating that the company was inspected by
officials of NEERI, KSPCB and District Collectorate, Thrissur on
14.01.2015, 15.01.2015, 12.08.2015 and 13.08.2015. NEERI
submitted the inspection reports on 23.11.2015 and
08.02.2016. KSPCB inspected the company and during the last
inspection it was noticed that company has complied with all
the recommendations of NEERI, except recommendations
No.14 and 21 regarding clearing of weeds along the banks, of
Chalakudy River and dredging of bed of Chalakudy River,
respectively. These recommendations can be fulfilled only with
the association of Kadukutty Grama Panchayat and Irrigation
Department. The company had already taken necessary follow
up action in this regard. The Analysis Report of effluent
samples collected from the outlet of the company on
08.02.2016 show that as against the permissible limit of 5.5-
9.0 mg/l the value is found as 8.3 mg/l, as against permissible

46
limit of 30 mg/l the value is found as 10.4 mg/l, the
suspended solids was found to have the value as 24 mg/l as
against the permissible limit of 100 mg/l and the Dissolved
phosphates is 0.26 mg/l as against the permissible limit of 5
mg/l and Oil and Grease were found Below Detectable Level
and the Ammonical Nitrogen was found 8.12 mg/l as against
the permissible limit of 50 mg/l.
37. Considering the progress made in the
implementation of the NEERI recommendations, Consent to
Operate was renewed to the unit on 30.12.2015 with validity
upto 30.06.2018. The Board assured that they would monitor
the unit regularly. Another additional affidavit was filed on
21.04.2016 by Respondent No.4, KSPCB stating that as
directed by the Tribunal in the order dated 11.03.2016 the
damaged pipeline was inspected by the KSPCB on 21.03.2016.
On inspection it was found that the pipeline carrying the
treated effluent from the company to Chalakudy river was
found in partially broken stage at a particular point. Certain
portion of this pipeline was laid along and under the bed of a
Natural thodu (Canal) through which there is flow of water.

47
The broken part of the pipeline is at this point. The thodu is
reported to be a Poramboke land under the custody of
Kadukutty Grama Panchayat. The broken portion of pipeline is
already under the water and certain quantity of effluent is
found discharged through the hole of the broken pipe into the
thodu and mixture of effluent and water is seen flowing in the
thodu. It is roughly estimated that about 1/3rd effluent leaked
into the thodu through the broken portion of the pipeline.
Black coloured sludge like materials could be found to be
deposited beside damaged part of the pipeline. But at the
time of inspection no sludge like materials could be found to
be discharged into the thodu along with the effluent. The hole
of the broken pipeline is not visible. It was learnt that the hole
is having about 30 cm. diameter. The flow in the thodu was
also found to be partially obstructed with some wooden
materials by some unknown persons and the flow rate in the
thodu is very slow.
38. The Board got knowledge about the damage of the
pipeline when a complaint was received alleging break-down of
pipeline of the company carrying effluent to Chalakudy in the

48
month of April 2015. The complaint was enquired and Board
issued a notice to the company to stop the discharge of
effluent through the broken pipeline into the thodu and into
the fields. In reply, the company reported that they noticed a
leakage in the pipeline on 08.03.2015 and repaired the same
on 11.03.2015. Though the company contended that leakage
was arrested, it was still continuing. It was represented by the
company that some outside people have blocked the pipeline
partially by putting concrete blocks into the broken portion.
39. During the month of January 2016, public agitated
against the discharge of effluent into the thodu through the
hole of the broken pipe. Based on the compliant received from
the Board direction was issued to the company on 04.01.2016
to redress the complaint. In response to the direction given by
the Board, the company reported that they were not able to
carry out the repairing works due to obstruction by the
agitators. The Board collected effluent samples from the
authorised outlet of the company inside the company premises
and also from the damaged part of the pipe line carrying
effluent from the company to Chalakudy river. The samples

49
taken from the damaged portion are found to be a mixture of
effluent and water flowing through the thodu. The water
flowing in the thodu was slightly in agitated condition during
the sampling time due to gushing up of effluent through the
broken hole. The effluent carrying pipeline of the company
ends almost at the middle of the Chalakudy river. It is about
2.5 mtrs below the water level of the river. Hence it was not
possible to collect effluent sample from that final discharge
point in the Chalakudy River.
40. The Consent to Operate given by the Board to the
company, provides 7 effluent parameters. Therefore, analysis
of samples was done for the consented parameters. In
addition to the consented parameters, TDS and Chlorides were
also analysed. The analysis of the effluent samples taken from
the breakage point of the pipeline shows that pH 7.1, BOD -
9.0, COD 48.0, Suspended Solids 55.0, Dissloved
Phosphates BDL, Oil & Grease 10, Ammonical Nitrogen
130.2, Total Dissolved Solids 4914 and Chlorides 2729.7.
So also the effluent taken from the authorised outlet of the
company shows that pH 7.5, BOD 34.4, COD 72,

50
Suspended Solids 28, Dissloved Phosphates BDL, Oil &
Grease 9.1, Ammonical Nitrogen 10.1, Total Dissolved
Solids 3141 and Chlorides 1637.8. The parameters such as
TDS and Chlorides were omitted from the Schedule VI of
General Standards for discharging Environmental Pollutants
Part A- Effluent as per Rule 2(d) (i) of the Environment
(Protection) Third Amendment Rules 1993 vide Notification
dated 31.12.1993. Therefore the Board has omitted the TDS
and Chlorides from the consented parameters.
41. The analysis report shows that BOD slightly exceeded
the standards in the effluent collected from the authorised
outlet of the unit. All other parameters are within the
prescribed standards. The analysis report of effluent collected
from the broken portion of pipeline showed that the
Ammonical Nitrogen exceeded the standards prescribed in the
Consent to Operate. Though both samples were taken on the
same day, the sampling time was different. The company does
the process of backwashing of its sand filters of their fresh
water treatment plant 3 times a day. The backwash water is
taken to the polishing pond and after settling, the clear water
51
is discharged along with the treated effluent. Hence, there is
dilution of effluent at the time of discharging of the sand filter
water from polishing pond to the treated effluent outlet. The
dilution is not a continuous process. The decrease of TDS
between the sand filter of the effluent treatment plant and the
final effluent outlet might have occurred due to the dilution of
the effluent as described above. During the joint inspection
conducted along with NEERI and the officials of the District
Collectorate, Thirssur on 12.08.2015 and 13.08.2015, the
Board has collected water samples from the Chalakudy river.
The analysis report of water samples collected from different
points of Chalakudy river shows the values of Chlorides at
Upstream of water intake 14 mg/l, effluent discharging point
16 mg/l, 500 Meters downstream of effluent discharging point
12 mg/l, 2kms., downstream of discharging point 14 mg/l, and
3 kms downstream of discharging point 16 mg/l. The
guidelines appended to the schedule to the notification state
that while permitting the discharge of effluent and emissions
into the environment, State Boards have to take into account
the assimilative capacity of the receiving bodies especially
water bodies so that the quality of the intended use of

52
receiving water is not affected. Where such quality is likely to
be affected discharges should not be allowed into water
bodies. The above analysis report indicates that the water
quality of Chalakudy river for the intended use of drinking
water is not at all affected due to discharge of effluent from
the company. Hence, the guideline for permitting the
discharge of effluent to the water bodies as per Environment
(Protection) Rules are followed with regard to the parameters
of TDS and Chlorides.
42. Additional reply has been filed by respondent No.4,
KSPCB dated 22.12.2016 submitting that the quantity of
sludge that can be handled by the company NGIL is 18000
tonne / year (1500 tonne / month) as per Consent to Operate
issued to them. The quantity was specified under condition No.
6.9 of the Consent to Operate and it is also specified in the
condition that sale of semi-solid sludge to outside parties shall
be stopped on commissioning of Bio-gas plant and sludge shall
be processed in the Bio-gas Plants.
43. Accordingly the company commissioned two
Anaerobic Bio Digesters. The first Anaerobic Digester was

53
commissioned in March 2014 and the second Anaerobic
Digester was commissioned in October 2015. After the
commissioning of Anaerobic Digester, the generation of sludge
is reported to have been reduced to 900 tonnes / month
(10800 tonnes / year).
44. A letter dated 17.11.2016 was received from the
company by the Board stating that the sludge generated by
the company is not a Hazardous waste as per the Hazardous
wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules,
2016. Hence, authorization for handling the sludge waste is
not mandatory. However, the company shall ensure that the
solid wastes are handled and disposed without causing any
environmental pollution.
45. The industry Nitta Gelatin India Ltd., respondent No.8
in application 305/13, respondent No.6 in application No.309
of 2013 and respondent No.5 in application 149 of 2015 filed
counter affidavits in all the three applications contending that
the company registered under the Companies Act is having
46.43 of the shareholding by Nitta Gelatin incorporated Japan
and 34.07 % by Kerala State Industrial Development

54
Corporation. The Chairman of the company is the Additional
Chief Secretary, Industries Department, Government of
Kerala. The company has a factory at Kathikoodam in
Kadukutti Grama Panchayat which is engaged in the
manufacture of Ossein by adopting the modern technology
developed by Nitta Gelatin Inc., Japan, which is one of the
world leaders in the manufacture of Gelatin. The factory
started commercial production in 1979 and has been
functioning under the name of Kerala Chemicals and Proteins
(I) Ltd. which was subsequently changed as Nitta Gelatin (I)
Ltd. The company is engaging approximately 500 employees
and the factory at Kathikoodam is having more than 150
employees, apart from giving indirect employment to others.
A group of employees, who belong to 3 or 4 families in and
around the factory premises with the assistance and
connivance of some employees of the locality, started agitation
against the company with ulterior motives. The Writ Petitions
are part of the said concerted action. Earlier, a complaint was
filed before the Human Rights Commission as HRMP.No.416 of
2005. After filing objection and hearing all the parties, the
Commission dismissed the complaint on 18.07.2016. It is

55
presumed that the applicant in O.A.305 of 2014 is the son of
Mr.Franco Mathew, a dismissed employee of the company for
proven misconduct. The Industrial Dispute raised by him
was later settled by payment of amounts agreed to between
the parties. A cousin of that employee had filed a complaint
before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thrissur as complaint
No.B2/7356/2008. Another cousin by name, Benny Thelakkat
filed a suit in O.S.85 of 2012 before the Munsiff Court,
Challakkudi alleging that the company is causing pollution.
Earlier also, one, Mr.Poulose Thelakkat filed O.S.178 of 1995
before the Munsiff Court, Chalakkudi, which was dismissed
and Appeal A.S 292/2004 filed before the District Court,
Thrissur challenging the judgment of the District Munsiff, was
also dismissed. All these litigations were started by different
family members of the applicant. A Public Interest Litigation
was also filed before the Honble High Court of Kerala in
W.P.10294 of 2002 which was dismissed by the Honble High
Court. O.S.595 of 2005 filed before the Munsiff Court,
Chalakkudy was also rejected for non payment of balance
Court Fee. Another petition filed before the Revenue Divisional
Officer, Tiruchur A.2/12484/2004 was also dismissed.

56
46. The company has been functioning for the past 33
years. The end product of the company is Gelatin, which is
widely used for pharmaceutical applications. Large quantity of
Gelatin is being exported to various other countries. Local
Grama Panchayat also started action against the company for
the reasons best known to it. During 2011-2012, the Panchayat
did not renew the licence. The company was constrained to
approach the Honble High Court by filing W.P.(C) No.8793 of
2011. In the light of the Consent granted by the Pollution
Control Board, the Honble High Court granted an interim order
permitting the company to function. During 2012-2013 also the
licence was not renewed. It was challenged by the company
before the Honble High Court in W.P.(C) 7322 of 2012. Both
the Writ Petitions are pending before the Honble High Court. In
W.P(C) No.7322 of 2012, to ascertain the actual facts, the
Honble High Court directed the Pollution Control Board
authorities to conduct a thorough investigation and submit a
report. The Board conducted an inspection and submit a report
before the Honble High Court. An advocate Commissioner was
also appointed, who after inspection, submitted a report. Based
on these reports, the Honble High Court granted an interim

57
order in favour of the company. For 2012-2013 also when
Panchayat did not renew the licence, the company filed W.P
No. 7322 of 2012 wherein also, an interim order to function
was granted by the Honble High Court. Earlier, during 2009-
2010, the Panchayat had refused to renew the licence. When
it was challenged in W.P.20891 of 2009, the Honble High Court
granted an interim order and directed to decide the question on
the pollution by the Pollution Control Board. The Board has
conducted a strict and periodical examination and submitted a
report. Based on that report, Consent was granted, which was
valid upto 30.06.2013. The Consent was later renewed from
time to time.
47. Complaints were filed before the Chief Minister and
the Pollution Control Board. Hence, the Pollution Control Board
was very much diligent in the functioning of ETP of the
company. The question of pollution allegedly caused by the
company was the subject matter of the litigations before the
various forums. It was thoroughly examined by such forums
and the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board were
being implemented and complied with. Very high standards of

58
pollution control measures are adopted by the company and
more than three crores of rupees were invested by the
company for ETP plant alone. In addition, approximately Rs.5
crores have been spent to implement the recommendations of
the Expert Committee appointed by the Government of Kerala.
A meeting was convened by the respondent No.1, Industries
Department and an Expert Committee was formed with
Dr.Lakshmikutty as Chairperson. The Expert Committee, which
consists of 8 members, convened a meeting of all political
parties, the Panchayat authorities, persons complaining against
the functioning of the company and after hearing and based on
the study of the Expert Committee, they submitted a report
containing 13 suggestions to the industries department. Based
on the said report, the industries department passed an order
on 03.11.2011 directing the company to execute the
suggestions of the Expert Committee. Based on the
suggestions, the company submitted an Action Plan before the
meeting held on 07.12.2011 under the Chairmanship of the
Honble Chief Minister of Kerala. The meeting accepted the
Action Plan submitted by the respondent No.8, company.

59
Under the Action Plan, the company was granted time till
December 2012 for carrying out the suggested works.
48. The Committee also formed a monitoring
Committee under the Chairmanship of MLA Shri B.D.Devasi.
The Company implemented the suggestions as per the Action
Plan on war footing. The monitoring Committee is supervising
the actions of the company. The Company is submitting a
monthly report to the monitoring committee, Kerala State
Pollution Control Board and the Government of Kerala. In
addition, the Kerala State Pollution Control Board used to
conduct meetings for reviewing the progress.
49. The allegation that the company is taking two crore
litres of fresh water from Chalakkudi river every day is not
correct. The fresh water consumption per day is 3400 m3. The
Kerala State Pollution Control Board granted Consent in its
renewal dated 30.06.2012 for consuming the said quantity. The
allegation that 80 tonnes of effluents were discharged into the
Chalakudi river is false. No effluents are discharged into the
Chalakudi river. After treatment, the treated water alone is
discharged into the Chalakudy river. The pH of the water

60
discharged into the Chalakudy river is displayed at the main
gate of the company, which is visible to the general public. No
decomposed particles, animal bone marrow and flesh, hydraulic
acid and other hazardous chemicals etc. are discharged into
the river. The parameters of the water discharged are taken
on day to day basis by the company and on a monthly basis by
the KSPCB. After the treatment of the effluents, no wastage
is generated by the company. The solid effluent is used as
manure. There are purchasers to purchase the said manure
from the company. The said manure is sold by the company.
The Kerala Agricultural University and Tamil Nadu Agricultural
University have conducted a study on the sludge generated by
the company and certified that the ETP sludge is the co-source
organic manure. The Pollution Control Board has given a
certificate to the effect that ETP sludge is non hazardous in
nature. The allegation that 1,20,000 ltrs of HCl is used in the
production process is incorrect. So also, the allegation that
due to the negligence of the company, the pipes and manholes
are broken and are leaking and the toxic materials are allowed
to spread to the neighbourhood causing environmental
degradation of the entire area, is not correct. The Advocate

61
Commissioner appointed in W.P.(C) No.8793 of 2011 by the
Honble High Court filed a report showing that the allegations
are false. The allegation that the company is causing pollution
is not correct. In fact, the company is functioning based on the
Consent given by the KSPCB. There is no prohibition by the
Pollution Control Board as alleged. The bio-gas plant inside the
factory premises accidentally collapsed on 01.11.2011. At that
time, the Pollution Control Board had prohibited the functioning
of the company and in compliance of the directions, the factory
was closed. Thereafter, various recommendations were put-
forward by the Committee and such recommendations and
suggestions were substantially carried out and in respect of the
remaining recommendations, time was given upto 31.12.2012.
The report of the KSPCB showing that the samples were
collected on 14.02.2012 by the Board, produced along with
the application is not true. It is understood that the samples
taken which had led to the report dated 21.02.2012, was not
under genuine circumstances. The sample was made polluted
as the parameters are above normal. The report of the analysis
was perused and reliance cannot be placed on it to come to a
conclusion regarding the pollution. As already alleged, a

62
complaint before the Koratty Police Station was filed by the
company in this regard. The Pollution Control Board issued the
Consent only after careful analysis of the whole issue. The
company has installed machinery for treating effluents. Most
modern technology is being employed in the ETP. The company
is having a full fledged Pollution Control Board approved
laboratory for testing the effluent and treated water. Samples
are taken on every day basis and tested in the laboratory of
the respondent. The results are kept in the office of the
company for further reference. So, no reliance can be placed
on the report and the circular dated 09.08.2004 referred to in
the application is not applicable. The commercial production of
the company was started in the year 1979.The circular issued
on 09.08.2004, says about the siting criteria for industries and
therefore, not applicable to the industries which were already
existing prior to the date of circular. The circular dated
05.07.2012 issued by the KSPCB proves that the circular dated
09.08.2004 is applicable only to the new industries, which are
to be commenced after 09.08.2004 and is not applicable to
the existing industries, which are being operated prior to
09.08.2004. The pipeline which carries the treated effluent

63
from the factory to the Chalakkudy river was purposely broken
by some unknown people of the locality. A Complaint was filed
before the police to investigate into the sabotage committed by
a few people of the locality and many illegal and unethical
means are employed to tarnish the image of the company. The
allegation that the directions of the Pollution Control Board with
regard to pollution control measures are not implemented is
not correct. When there was an accident in the biogas plant,
the Pollution Control Board directed the closure of the industry
and accordingly, the industry was closed. After clearing the
entire premises and after implementing all the directions of the
Board, the Board granted Consent to re-start the company
and accordingly, the factory is functioning. It was because of
the exerting pressure on the Panchayat, the Panchayat refused
to issue licence inspite of the valid consent issued by the
Board.
50. In the meeting chaired by the Chief Minister on
11.02.2011, a time bound action plan was submitted by the
company. It was approved with the recommendations of the
Expert Committee. One of the recommendations was reduction

64
in the water consumption to 3000 mq per day by December
2012. The water consumption was accordingly reduced and
now the consumption is 3,928.400 mq per day, which was
cross checked by the Board officials. The Writ Petitions filed
before the Honble High Court is not a public interest litigation
but a litigation to wreck vendetta of the applicant against the
company.
The Arguments:
51. Mr.Mohan, learned senior counsel appearing for
applicants in all applications argued that the company has been
classified as Red category Largescale Industry by the Pollution
Control Board, as per the siting criteria prescribed in Boards
Circular dated 09.08.2004, there cannot be any dwellings in
existence within a distance of 100 meters from the company.
But a number of houses are located within the prohibited
distance. The report of the Environmental Engineer of the
Pollution Control Board discloses that 46 houses are located
within 100 meters from the boundary of the company. Though
the verification report of the industry shows that the residences
are 250 meters away from the company, when the report of
65
the Engineer of the Board establishes that within 100 meters of
the compound wall, there are 46 residential houses, the
Pollution Control Board should have taken action and still no
action has been taken. The argument of the learned counsel is
that the Board did not conduct proper audit and the company
was dumping the sludge into the river along with fluid. It is
argued that, this fact is clear from the various reports prepared
by the Board. Reliance was placed on the report of the
Environmental Engineer dated 12.06.2012, where it is recorded
that the company is still transporting semi solid sludge and foul
odour was felt near the surroundings of the houses, adjacent
to the compound wall of the company. When inspected, the
effluent is being discharged into the Chalakkudi river. Foul
odour and change in colour was felt. Semi solid effluents were
in existence in the same condition as it was before. Reliance
was also placed on the communication dated 09.07.2010
issued by the Board to the industry, where it is revealed that
during inspection, effluent was seen discharged from the
manhole. Some dead fish and frogs were also found at this
point. The Complaint was found genuine. The same incident
was reported on 01.07.2010. On inspection on 02.07.2010

66
also, waste water and sludge were seen discharged through the
broken manhole. The company was directed to ensure that
sludge is not discharged through the pipeline. Reliance was
also placed on the direction of the Board dated 03.11.2011
where it is disclosed that during inspection of the industry and
its premises by the Board officials on 07.07.2011, the ETP
sludge was seen dumped on the side of NH047 near flyover at
Kuttanellur and during enquiry on the complaint by Board
officials on 22.08.2011, blackish sludge was seen deposited in
the bed of Karikkathodu where the treated effluent carrying
pipeline is laid and whitish oily slurry was seen suspended and
stagnated at Kundukadavu near the final effluent discharge
point. It is also revealed that the analysis report of the
effluent collected from the discharge point at Kundukadavu on
23.08.2011 showed that the concentration of parameters is in
excess of the limits specified. The sludge from the collapsed
biogas plant overflowed near the compound wall and leaked
through the bottom of the compound wall to the backside road
causing environmental problems.

67
52. Learned counsel also relied on the communication of
the District Collector addressed to the Secretary to the
Government, Industries Department dated 06.02.2011 where it
is stated that when the team inspected the factory, it was
found that waste water is being discharged into the river
causing serious water pollution. It was also stated that there
are residue of sludge leaked from the pipe carrying waste
water into the river emitting strong odour. Large deposit of silt
mixed with sludges has been formed on the banks of the river,
which is the result of earlier discharge of sludge. Letter dated
06.01.2016 by the Secretary of the Kadukutty Grama
Panchayat to the Company was relied on by the learned
counsel to argue that on 04.01.2016 a team of Kakkad PHC
visited the spot and filed a report stating that dissoluble and
un-dissoluble biochemical substance which was black in colour
with a stringent odour, was found at the spot where the
pipeline was broken. It is also argued that the decision of the
Panchayat dated 07.01.2016 also establishes that untreated
effluent is being discharged into the river causing ecological
and health problems. Learned counsel argued that even the
reply filed by the Board 16.04.2016 records the presence of

68
sludge at the point where the pipeline was broken and the
Board ought to have directed the industry to cease the
pumping of effluent through the pipeline, having found the
sludge at the leakage point. Learned counsel argued that when
the effluent is being discharged into the river and it is clear
that the discharge constitutes an unauthorised discharge in
violation of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,
1974, the Board should not have renewed the Consent.
Learned counsel argued that realising this fact, the Board
directed to stop the operations in the industry. Though the
company by letter dated 30.04.2015 to the Board, claimed that
the leak was arrested, leak was never arrested. Learned
counsel argued that the ETP sludge is not compost and it is
toxic. The argument is that the Consent letter mandates the
ETP sludge (18,000 t/yr) shall be dried, processed to manure
(nutrisoil), stored securely and disposed. Sale of semi solid
sludge to outside parties shall be stopped on commissioning
biogas plants and the sludge then processed in the biogas
plants. It is argued that the company claimed that the ETP
sludge is being sold as compost and it is declared as safe by
the authorities. The ETP sludge is being let out through the
69
effluent pipeline and that is why the presence of sludge is
noticed at the point where the pipeline had broken. It is argued
that the sludge is toxic and in fact, it is not useful as compost
and it contains very high concentration of heavy metals. It is
argued that the analysis report dated 14.05.2010 of the Kerala
Agricultural University shows that the Carbon : Nitrogen ratio
does not meet the required norms and the presence of heavy
metals, Led and Nickel is very high. Learned counsel also
pointed out that the communication of the Assistant Director of
Agriculture, Palakkad to the Principal Agricultural Officer,
Palakkad dated 15.02.2016 shows that based on the reports of
the visual and print media and on the instruction of the District
Collector, he conducted a field inspection of the plantation
which belongs to one, Sri Vinod, Pathipara, Kaliyapuram,
Muthalmada, Palakkad on 21.01.2016 along with the Principal
Agricultural Officer, Palakkad and Board officials and on
enquiry, industrial waste material from the company was seen
deposited in bulk quantities at different place in the plantation.
During inspection it was seen that the material is not used as
an organic manure for crop production, but only deposited at
different parts of the plantation and therefore, the claim of the

70
company that the sludge is being used as organic manure is
not believable. It is stated therein that the analytical report of
sample submitted to the Department of Soil Science and
Agricultural Chemistry reveals that Nitrogen and Potash, the
major required plant nutrients are not present at the required
level as per standards and all other parameters like moisture,
colour, organic carbon etc. do not satisfy the minimum
standards required for an organic manure and Mercury is
present beyond the permissible level, which is harmful to
human beings, animals, crops and the environment.
53. Learned counsel argued that the clandestine
dumping of the sludge by the industry is clear from the reply
received under RTI Act from the Pollution Control Board dated
01.10.2014 where it is stated that the waste dumped at
Pollachi was directed to be removed within 24 hours and even
the marketing engineer of the industry participated in the
meeting held at the Police Station. Learned counsel argued that
the report of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) filed as
directed by the Tribunal in Application No.412 of 2016,(PB)

71
shows that unutilized sludge accumulated over a period of
time is found in Kaliyapuram area, is severely affected by rains
and the analysis of such sludge confirms that it is highly
dangerous to the surrounding environment. Further, the
analysis of the mercury level was also made. It is therefore
argued that the company has not treated the effluent properly.
so also, the sludge, which is toxic in nature, is not being
disposed properly and the company is causing pollution to the
environment.
54. Learned counsel argued that the sludge is being
disposed without any accounting. The reports of the Pollution
Control Board and NEERI did not address this issue. There is no
material balance in so far as the material consumed by the
industry, the products produced and the waste generated and
disposed. It is pointed out that the raw materials consumed by
the industry is 115.048 TPD and the permitted quantum of
products is 62.1 TPD. Therefore, the waste generated by the
industry per annum should be 19326.02 tonnes. It is pointed
out that as per the form submitted by the industry for getting
72
approval for organic fertiliser sold by it, the total annual
production capacity is 2600 MT. As per the verification form of
Board dated 23.06.2012, the industry is permitted to generate
a total of 18,000 MT of ETP waste, of which 2/3rd is converted
as nutrisoil after drying in a drier. 1/3rd is now sold to outside
parties as semi solid sludge, which is proposed to be used in
two biogas plants to be constructed. Therefore, 6,000 MT is
cleared to be sold as nutrisoil and 12,000 MT is to be used in
the biogas plants.
55. Learned counsel argued that therefore, the total
consumption including crushed bone, HCl and hydrated lime
should be 41992.52 TPA and the total production including
Ossein, Limed Ossein, Dicalcium Phosphate should be 22,666.5
MT and the total waste generated is 19326.02 MT, while the
total ETP waste as per Consent order is 18,000 TPA and spent
oil is 2000 TPA .It is pointed out that if so, the sludge that can
be converted into fertilizer should be 12000 TPA. However, in
the form submitted for approval for fertilizer, it is only 2600 MT
per month. Learned counsel argued that even according to the

73
report of CPCB, there is a gap of 1326.02 TPA between the
waste generated by the industry and the waste permitted to be
generated from the ETP. If it is assumed that the sludge
generated from the industry is sold as compost, and 120000
TPA of sludge is converted into solid fertilizer, there is no
accounting for 7326.02 TPA of solid waste. Learned counsel
argued that these figures represent mis-match in the
permission granted to the industry by the Board. Learned
counsel argued that the quantity of raw materials consumed
and production details as admitted by the industry for the
years from 2008 to 2014, are provided in the table 5.1 of
NEERI report dated May, 2014 and from the figures it is clear
that the industry consumed the raw materials more than the
quantum permitted by the Board and it has also produced
finished products in excess. The waste generated from the
process is also not accounted for. Learned counsel argued that
it is not known how many tonnes of so called fertilizer was
even sold during these years and the fact that sludge has been
noticed by the authorities shows that the industry has released
the effluent mixed with the sludge into the River. Learned
counsel argued that the reply received from the Board under
74
RTI Act reveals that the total sludge generated is 750 TPA.
But as per the report of the CPCB, the sludge generated from
the ETP is only 15 to 18 T per day, which translates to 5475 to
6570 TPA. If this is the quantum of sludge generated from the
ETP, there is great variance in the material balance. Learned
counsel argued that the industry has not offered any
explanation to this fact.
56. Learned counsel also argued that the industry is not
treating its effluent and releasing the effluents not conforming
to the parameters mandated by the KSPCB. Though the
Effluent Treatment System of the industry consists of
Equalization tank, coagulation tank, flocculation tank, primary
clarifier, aeration tank, secondary clarifier, tertiary clarifier,
pressure sand filter, delay pond, rotary vacuum filter, filter
press, the ETP does not have any system in place to remove
dissolved solids and chlorides and in the absence of a Reverse
Osmosis system, the industry cannot claim that it is removing
salts from the effluent.

75
57. Learned counsel argued that the figures provided in
the NEERI report shows that the industry is not treating the
effluent to remove calcium chloride salt and other components
as the level of TSS, TDS, COD and BOD are not satisfying the
prescribed parameters. It is argued that the industry is merely
diluting the effluent with fresh water and after passing
through the clarifier, the effluent is released into the river
water, unloading the entire quantum of chemicals present in
the effluent including calcium chloride. As the ETP does not
have an RO system or similar ion process to remove salts
present in the effluent, the industry s claim that it is treating
the effluent to remove elements from the effluent, can never
be said correct. It is therefore argued that there is no proper
effluent treatment system in the industry and it cannot be
permitted to continue its operations without proper ETP.
58. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants further
argued that the report submitted by CPCB after inspection as
directed by the Tribunal in the Original Application NO.412 of
2016 pending before the Tribunal against the company, also
shows that the industry is diluting its effluent without properly

76
treating it. The report of CPCB also shows that the back water
from the sand filters is treated in polishing pond and mixed
with treated effluent from delay pond and thereafter
discharged into the river. The report also shows that they have
not accounted for the quantum of water required for the
dilution. The report of CPCB after tabulating effluent
parameters at various points of the ETP has stated that the
treated effluent from delay pond is diluted with the back wash
water (Fresh water) through sand filters before discharging into
the river and this has resulted in dilution of TDS, COD and
chloride concentrations at the final disposal point. Learned
counsel argued that comparison of the said figures to the
corresponding values would clearly show how the industry has
been diluting the effluent and adding pollutants into the river
all these years. Learned counsel argued that the crucial issue
that needs to be addressed is that there is no accounting for
spent backwash which will contain high levels of particulate
matter, but the industry is silent on this issue. It is argued
that the water pollution caused by the industry is evident from
the finding of the CPCB that Ammonia in the water discharged
is 1 : 1 times the permitted quantum and the excess emission

77
from stacks and the fact that PM levels were high in one
location is the indication that the bag filters used by the
industry are not adequate. Learned counsel vehemently argued
that unless Zero Liquid Discharge is mandated, pollution of
water cannot be controlled. It is also argued that since the
industry has not installed any flow meters in the ETP, details
of water consumption cannot be calculated. It is also pointed
out that the effluent discharged from the industry is not
metered and there is no system in place to check or detect
any leakage in the effluent pipeline and since the discharge
outlet pipeline is under the water, no monitoring of the
discharge is possible. Learned counsel argued that the
directions issued by CPCB establish that the industry has been
operating in violation of the law and therefore, necessary
directions are to be issued including mandating Zero Liquid
Discharge.
59. Learned counsel argued that though the industry
subsequently provided data on the anaerobic digesters, the
quantity of Carbondioxide, quantum of biogas generated etc.
are not furnished and it is clear that the industry does not have
78
the capacity to breakdown the claimed quantum of solids and
generate biogas. Though it is also argued that the industry
listed the places where AAQ stations are located, these stations
are not connected online to the regulator and there is no real
time monitoring of the industry. Learned counsel also argued
that the reports submitted by the NEERI by taking the data
from stations imperfectly located has compromised its
scientific reliability. Though the industry claims that the outflow
of the ETP is metered, NEERI does not record the outflow
details and does not mention the presence of electromagnetic
flow meters in the ETP outlet. None of the reports of Pollution
Control Board or the replies submitted by the industry
mentions the existence of electromagnetic flow meters in the
ETP outlet. The report of CPCB clearly discloses that no flow
meters are installed at the ETP outlet. Without a clear audit of
water balance, it is not possible to ascertain that the industry is
not consuming water more than the permitted quantity, which
will result in an increase in the quantum effluent generated. As
there was a huge variance between input and output, there
was no material balance. Though there was variance between
input and output, the industry has stated that 21 tonnes

79
equivalent of solid is converted in the anaerobic bioreactor . It
is also to be taken into account the claim of the industry that
the total quantum of effluent generated in the (organic and
inorganic) industry is approximately 2900 cu.m. per day and
out of this, the sludge of 1860 cu.m per day is processed from
the organic stream and 21 TPD equivalent of solid is
converted into biogas. As the said quantity is included in the
total effluent generated, a total of 21 tonnes per day equivalent
of solid is converted into biogas at the rate of approximately
2900 cu m per day. But the maximum capacity of 2 digesters
at the rate of 930 cu.m.per day would be only 1860 and not
3000 as claimed by the industry. It is also argued that the
effluent from DCP stream is not treated in the anaerobic bio
digesters and the solids present in the DCP stream is around
23.63358 tonnes. The effluent from the industry is not treated
in the bio-digester, and the industry has no other treatment
system in place to remove the dissolved solids, suspended
solids present in the effluent stream, and the industry has also
not explained as to how the reduction of solids present in the
stream is dealt with. According to the learned counsel, in
addition to this, 3.5 tonnes of waste is also generated from

80
bone processing and even according to the industry, the first
anaerobic digester was commissioned only on 22.03.2014 and
the second digester in October, 2015. The industry is therefore
bound to explain how the huge volume of sludge and waste
was managed before and after the installation of digesters. The
learned counsel argued that each digester can hold 352 M3 of
effluent and can digest a maximum volume of 704 M3 in 45
hours and therefore, the claim of the industry that they are
breaking down 1800 M3 of effluent stream from Ossein plant
with 21 MT of solids into biogas on daily basis is unbelievable
and cannot be relied on. It was argued that when the capacity
of both the digesters is put together is only 704 M3 and with
HRT of 46 hours, they can process only a maximum volume of
11.099 M3 effluent in 30 days, out of the total volume of 54
000 M3 of fresh effluent generated every month at the rate of
1800 M3 per day and therefore, there is a net shortfall in
treatment capacity for 42,981 M3 effluent . As the digester
capacity is only to treat 20.405% of daily effluent from Ossein
plant and the remaining 79.594% of daily generated effluent
is discharged into Chalakkudy river without treatment. It is
thus clear that the industry is causing water pollution, which

81
cannot be allowed to continue and necessary directions are to
be issued.
60. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the industry,
M/s.Nitta Gelatin India Company, argued that the M/s.Nitta
Gelatin India Limited is one of the world leaders in the
manufacture of gelatin and the industry is at Kathikoodam in
Kadukutty Grama Panchayat and it has adopted the most
modern technology of M/S.Nitta Gelatin Inc., Japan. Learned
senior counsel argued that the industry has been functioning
since 1979 and is having Consent granted by the Kerala State
Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) and without challenging the
Consent under Section 31 of the Air (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Act, 1981 and under Section 28 of the Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the
applications are not maintainable. It was argued that the
pollution level in and around the industry has been constantly
monitored and it was consistently found to be within the
permissible limit by various agencies, like, NEERI, CPCB and
KSPCB. The quality of water in the Chalakkudy river and the
Wells nearby have been found to be well within the acceptable

82
limits of Indian Standard Drinking Water Specifications and
inspite of these facts, the present frivolous applications have
been filed without any bonafides.
61. Learned senior counsel pointed out that the Circular
No.PCB/TAC/18/2004 is not applicable to the industries, which
had already established before the date of Circular and the
KSPCB in its report dated 12.07.2012 categorically declared
that the Circular is not applicable to the industries which
started functioning prior to the date of the said Circular and
therefore, the siting parameters relied on by the applicants is
not at all applicable and on that ground, the applicants cannot
contend that the industry of the respondent cannot function as
well. It is also argued that the industry is not dumping sludge
into the river as alleged and pointed out the report of the
NEERI dated May 2014 which specifically states that as
monitored the bottom sediments were not found at most of
the sampling locations in Chalakkudy river and the sediments
as observed were mostly sand and pebble or gravel. Rare
presence of benthic organisms belonging to pelecypoda and
Gastropods genera and Chironomouslearva belonging to

83
Chironomidae were observed and their presence indicates no
organic pollution in the river. Argument of the learned senior
counsel is that it is very clear that there is no discharge of
sludge along with the effluent into the Chalakkudy river as
canvassed by the applicants. It was also pointed out that
NEERI report of May 2014, also indicates that concentration of
suspended solids in the effluent has been consistently below
the stipulated norms, which is also clear from the NEERI report
dated 27.02.2015. As the concentration of suspended solids
has consistently been well within the norms prescribed by the
Board, the allegation of discharge of solids along with the
effluent into the river is only to be rejected. The argument is
that if sludge is discharged along with the effluent, the
suspended solids should be very high and as it is not the case,
it is to be found that there has not been any discharge of
sludge into the river or causing pollution thereby. It was
argued that the report filed by the Central Pollution Control
Board in the Original Application No.142 of 2016, also shows
that all the parameters are within the prescribed limits and
CPCB did not find presence of sludge either in the effluent

84
discharge pipe or in the Chalakkudy river, which completely
dis-proves the allegations raised by the applicants.
62. Learned senior counsel further argued that the report
of CPCB dated 07.11.2016 shows that the result of the
analysis of sludge collected from the sludge dumping site and
the sludge storage yard, establish that the concentration of
various parameters from the sludge comply with the standards
fixed for organic fertilizer as per the Fertilizer (Control) Order,
1985. It is also pointed out that the additional report filed by
CPCB dated 30.11.2016 on the mercury parameter also
establishes that the mercury level is also within the standards
prescribed by the Board. It is therefore, argued that the
sludge can be used as organic fertilizer and is not a toxic
substance as canvassed by the applicants. Learned counsel
pointed out that the report of NEERI of May 2014 proves that
the ETP sludge does not contain any hazardous constituents
and it is classified as non-hazardous and after a detailed
analysis of the solid waste generated at the industry, which
includes matured compost and materials from the yard, where
it was stocked by a buyer, it was concluded that the sludge is

85
non-hazardous. Learned senior counsel therefore argued that
the sludge generated by the industry is neither hazardous nor
toxic. Learned counsel argued that in the light of the findings in
the report, the submission of the applicants that the sludge is
highly dangerous to the environment is erroneous and
unfounded and there is no basis to arrive at such a
conclusion. The findings of the CPCB establish that bio-compost
conforms to the standard stipulated as per the Fertilizer
(Control) Order,1985 and it is suitable to be used as organic
fertilizer. It was pointed out that it was under the directions of
the Agriculture Office, the production of bio-compost was
stopped though it does not pose any threat to the surrounding
environment. It is pointed out that as per letter dated
09.02.2010, the KSPCB approved the usage of compost for all
types of food and plantation crops and that approval was based
on the analysis report of R & D wing of the Fertilizers and
Chemicals Travancore Limited (FACT). The learned counsel
argued that nutrisoil was sold to one, Mr.Vinod as raw material
for manufacturing of compost manure and as seen from the
report of CPCB dated 07.11.2016, the nutrisoil is also conforms
to the standards stipulated under the Fertilizer (Control)

86
Order,1985 for use as organic fertilizer. It is, therefore, argued
that the toxic element found to be dumped in the property of
Mr.Vinod , as per the report of CPCB, cannot be attributed to
the respondent industry. It is also pointed out that in the letter
addressed to the Advocate General of Kerala by the District
Collector, Palakkad on this issue, it was observed that hospital
waste, chicken waste etc are being dumped in the property of
Mr.Vinod and therefore, the toxicity of the samples collected
from the premises of Mr.Vinod, cannot be attributed to the
respondent industry., especially, in the light of the findings of
CPCB that the sludge is non-hazardous. The learned counsel
argued that the industry is not responsible for fish-kill and
pointed out that in the letter dated 07.06.2013 addressed by
the Environmental Engineer to the District Collector, it is
stated that the nitrates which caused the fish kill, cannot be
attributed to the respondent industry, as the nitrate is a
chemical used in the manufacture of fire works.
63. Learned Senior counsel also argued that there is no
merit in the arguments of the learned counsel for the
applicants regarding the material balance. It is argued that

87
the industry is maintaining strict material balance in
compliance with the Consent issued by KSPCB. Learned counsel
also pointed out that the gross raw materials consumed is
170.5 TPD which consists of 74 TPD of crushed bone, 1.5 TPD
of lime and 81.4 TPD of HCl and the concentration of HCl is
30% and 70% is water and therefore, the net quantity of HCl
consumed is only 24.4 TPD. Hence, the total net quantity of
material consumed is only 113.4 TPD. It is argued that during
the process, the raw materials undergo a lot of physico-
chemical changes and the pre treated and washed crushed
bone is transferred to the acid bath and treated with 4%
concentrated HCL for about 5-7 days to produce Ossein. This
process is called acidulation. The Ossein thus produced is
taken to the paddle washer for washing and for removing free
acid and impurities and also neutralized at the paddle washer
by adding hydrated lime. After such neutralization, Ossein is
dried and packed and exported or used by the industry for
conversion to gelatin, a product used widely in the
pharmaceutical and food industry. The dried Ossein production
is 13.3 TPD. Wet Ossein required for gelatin production is
pumped into the liming plant where it is treated with lime for
88
35-45 days and treated like as a whole transported to gelatin
unit for gelatin manufacture and limed Ossien production is
8.3 TPD. The Mono Calcium Phosphate (MCP) generated during
acidulation is pumped to the Di Calcium Phosphate (DCP) plant
and treated with hydrated lime solution for converting MCP to
DCP and the settled DCP slurry is filtered, dried and packed
and stored in closed storage and DCP production is 40.5 TPD.
Thus, the sinews and bone meal separated during crushed
bone pre-treatment is converted to meat meal in two
processes, namely, dry process and wet process. In dry
process it is packed and sold to local farmers as meat meal. It
is pointed out that the production is 1 TPD. The bone meal
separated after crushed bone washing is cooked with steam
and dried and sold to the farmers as sterilized bone meal.
According to the learned counsel, the total production is 63.1
TPD. The waste generated during the above processes is
treated in the ETP . The process waste generated is in two
streams, organic and inorganic. In the organic stream after
removal of grease, the water is neutralized and the next
process is degradation of organic compounds in the anaerobic
digesters 1 and 2. It is contended that approximately 21 TPD

89
equivalent of solid substance is converted into biogas at the
rate of 3000 cu m. per day. In the inorganic stream, the
effluent is treated in the flash mixer, followed by flocculator,
primary clarifier and Diffused Air Flocculatorfollowed and
thereafter, by aeration, the sludge from primary clarifier is
taken into thickener followed by Rotary Vaccum Drier, filter
press and sludge drier. The final sludge generated both in
organic and inorganic stream is 25 TPD. The effluent from DAF
1 and 2 further undergoes secondary and tertiary treatment
and finally being discharged into the river and during pre-
treatment of crushed bone, 3.5 TPD of bone meal and sinews is
generated. Therefore, the argument is that the total waste
generated would be 28.5 TPD and from the anaerobic reactor
approximately 21 TPD equivalent mass of biogas is generated
and if this is added to 63.1, the total output would be 112.6
TPD (63.1 +28.5 +21) as against the permitted output of
113.4 TPD and therefore, there is no material balance
unaccounted as canvassed by the applicants. Learned counsel
pointed out that the argument raised by the applicants that
there is no material balance is without taking into account the
loss of mass during the manufacturing process in liquid and

90
gases state and the mass equivalent of the biogas being
generated in the anaerobic reactors. Hence, there cannot be
any mis-match in the consent granted to the industry as
alleged by the applicants. Learned counsel argued that as per
the Consent order, the industry is authorized to generate
18000 TPY of solid waste amounting to 49.31 TPD and the
waste generated has always been within the said parameter.
The observation in the report of CPCB that the sludge
generated from the ETP is only 15 to 18 TPD is not based on
any scientific method. Learned counsel argued that the
efficiency of the ETP is clear from the observations of the
NEERI in its report as well as CPCB as the results show that all
the relevant parameters are below the stipulated levels. It is
pointed out that the report of NEERI dated May 2014 states
that the performance assessment of ETP indicates that the
characteristics of the final treated effluent meet the regulatory
standards fixed by KSPCB. The Consent order and compendium
of documents submitted by the industry prove that all
parameters of the effluent are below the stipulated norms. It is
also pointed out that the report of NEERI dated 27.02.2015
indicates that the performance of ETP is satisfactory and the

91
physic0 chemical characteristics of the effluent conform to the
standards fixed by KSPCB and therefore, the contention of the
applicants that the performance of ETP is not satisfactory, is
erroneous .
64. Learned counsel argued that it is clear from various
reports that the treated effluent discharged from the ETP has
no impact on the river water. It is pointed out that NEERIs
report dated May 2014 categorically states about the impact of
effluent discharge on Chalakkudy river as the river water
quality downstream of the discharge location of treated
effluent from the industry, indicates that no major impact is
observed in the characteristics of the river water with respect
to major physico-chemical parameters including heavy metals
and are well within acceptable limits of the Drinking Water
Standards Specification. It is pointed out that the Shannon-
Weiner Diversity Index and the Palmer Pollution Index also
indicate absence of organic pollutants. It is also pointed out
that the similar conclusion is drawn in the subsequent reports
of NEERI dated 27.02.2015, 10.10.2015 and 02.06.2016. It is
also pointed out that the analysis report of CPCB on the river
92
water samples indicates that all parameters are within the
Drinking Water Standards and the CPCB had taken the samples
of river water and bottom sediments. It was argued that
though CPCB found that iron concentration is high, it is the
same case on the iron concentration when the water was
collected even from upstream of the discharge point. It is
clear from the report that the discharge from the effluent
treatment plant is not making any adverse impact on the
quality of the water. Learned counsel therefore, argued that
the contention of the applicants that the industry is polluting
the Chalakkudy river is dis-proved.
65. Learned senior counsel also pointed out that the
standards originally fixed for TDS and Chlorides were excluded
from Schedule VI of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986
vide GSR 801 (E) dated 31.12.1993 and therefore, the TDS
and Chlorides are not relevant to find out the quality of the
effluent being discharged by the industry. It is also argued that
as the parameters of TDS and Chlorides are excluded with

93
effect from 31.12.1993, the industry cannot be compelled to
comply with those parameters.
66. Learned senior counsel also argued that the
inference made by CPCB in the report submitted in the Original
Application No.412 of 2016 (PB) to the effect that the sludge is
highly dangerous to the surrounding environment is
unfounded. It is pointed out that the very same report shows
that the analysis result of the sludge collected from sludge
dump site and sludge storage yard establish that the
concentration of various parameters from the sludge comply
with the standards for Organic Fertilizer and even the Mercury
parameter is within the standard prescribed and therefore,
there is no basis to conclude that the sludge is highly
dangerous, especially, when it can be used as organic
fertilizer. Hence, the observation that the sludge is highly
dangerous, is in-consistent to the report of NEERI and KSPCB
and even the findings of KSPCB .
67. Learned counsel also argued that the back wash
water from the sand filter is a process effluent , which contains
substantial quantity of suspended solids and thereafter, the

94
said water is treated at the polishing pond and then
discharged from the ETP along with other effluents. Learned
counsel argued that to the report of the CPCB filed in Original
Application No.412 of 2016,(PB) the respondent has filed a
detailed objection.
68. Learned counsel also argued that the attack made
by the applicants against the NEERI report based on AAQ
Monitoring station is without any scientific basis. It was argued
that NEERI conducted a comprehensive study of the AAQ
based on an Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network consisting
of 7 sampling locations covering 4 locations within the industry
premises ,namely (1) crushed bone godown area, (2) raw
effluent collection tank ,(3) tertiary clarifier in ETP area, and
(4) compost area and four locations in the residential area
namely, M/s.NGIl staff quarters road in Kathikudam,
Kathikudam and Thykottam and the observations made by
NEERI are based on the data collected from the said AAQ
monitoring stations. Learned counsel also argued that the
submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants
regarding the flow meter is also not sustainable. It was argued

95
that flow meters are installed for measuring the intake of fresh
water from the Chalakkudy river and the quantity of water
drawn is consistently found within the stipulated limit of 3000
cu m per day. It is argued that therefore, the discharge
quantity has always been less than the intake. It was also
argued that the flow meters are used for measuring the
processed effluents from the Ossein and Di-calcium
phosphate process and the effluents from the said process are
collected separately in an equalisation tank and thereafter
pumped to the respective primary flash mixers for further
treatment It has been taken note of by the NEERI in the report
dated May 2014. It is also pointed out that V-notches are
installed at the outlet of the ETP to measure the flow of
discharge and therefore, the quantity of the effluent being
processed in the ETP can be consistently monitored. The
CPCB has unfortunately failed to take note of this aspect. It
was also argued that the methodology adopted by the
applicant with respect to material balance , based on TSS and
TDS is not correct as it fails to take into account the various
critical aspects. The total input amounts to 113.4 TPD and the
products amount to 63.1 TPD. The total output is 112.6 which

96
is almost equal to the input. It is also argued that the
possibility of mercury contamination in HCl is possible only if
HCl is synthesized in a mercury cell process. It is argued that
none of the agencies that supply HCl to the industry use the
mercury cell process, which is an outdated process. Learned
counsel pointed out that the suppliers are TCC and
M/S.Chemplast and the former uses membrane process and
the later makes HCl from Ethylene Dichloride by Pyrolysis
route. In both these processes, there is no possibility of any
mercury contamination. It is argued that the industry analyses
every load of HCl that enters the premises and satisfies that
it is within the stipulation. It is also pointed out that the
report of NEERI shows that the sludge analysis for heavy
metls reveals that all heavy metals are within the parameters.
It is pointed out that the mercury level was found to be below
detectable level as seen from the report submitted by NEERI
dated 02.06.2016 . It is also argued that as far as the
concentration of HCl used in the industry is concerned, the
concentration is only 30% and not 32% as presumed by the
applicants and it varies from 28.5 % to 32%. Moreover, the
quantity of HCL consumed depends on the quantity of crushed

97
bone and vice versa. Even the 30% HCl is reduced to 4% for
acidulation and it does not make any difference even if the
percentage of HCl is 30% or 32%. It is therefore, argued that
the anaerobic digesters convert approximately 21 TPD of solid
substance into biogas and the inlets to the bio-digesters are
fitted with flow meters and the flow of effluents into the
digesters can be measured. The total quantum of effluent
generated by the industry is approximately 2900 cu.m. per
day. Out of this, the sludge in1860 cu.m. per day of effluent
from the organic stream is processed and 21 TPD equivalent
of solid is converted into biogas, since that quantity is
included in the total effluent generated. Learned counsel
would contend that a total of 21 TPD of solid waste is
converted into biogas at the rate of approximately 2900 cu.m.
per day. It is also argued that there is a total of 4 biogas
plants (bio-digesters) in the ETP system. One pair of digesters
converts the raw effluent from the equalization basin or
effluent collection tank which is directly fed into the anaerobic
digesters. Another pair of digesters plays the same role. It is
therefore argued that the total mass of solid substance
converted to gas is 18.91 TPD and the sludge processed in the

98
biogas plant feed from the primary clarifier and the secondary
clarifier and the total quantity converted is 2.8 TPD and the
grand total from all the plants amounts to 21.71 TPD and thus
it is clear that 21 TPD equivalent amount of solid substance
is converted into biogas and therefore, there is no material
imbalance.
69. The learned counsel appearing for KSPCB argued
that the Pollution Control Board is monitoring the industry
regularly and only on satisfying that the effluent discharge
satisfies all the prescribed parameters, Consent has been
renewed from time to time. It was also argued that the
quantity of sludge that can be dried, processed to manure,
stored and disposed by the industry as per the Consent Order
is 18000 TPD which is 1500 per month. It was also specified in
the condition that sale of semi solid sludge to outside parties
can be stopped on commissioning of biogas plants, sludge
shall then be processed in the biogas plants. Accordingly, the
Company commissioned two Anaerobic Bio Digesters. The first
Anaerobic Digester was commissioned in March 2014 and the
second Anaerobic Digester was commissioned in October

99
2015. Learned counsel submitted that after the commissioning
of Anaerobic Digester, the sludge generation has been
reported to be reduced to 900 tonnes / month namely, 10800
tonnes per year. It is also submitted the sludge generated by
the company is not a hazardous waste as per the Hazardous
Waste (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules,
2016 and therefore, authorisation for handling the sludge
waste is not mandatory. However, the Board shall ensure that
the solid wastes are handled and disposed without causing
any environmental pollution.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:
70. The following points arise for consideration:
1. Whether the functioning of ossein unit of the

respondent Nitta Gelatin India Ltd., at Kathikudam in the
Kadukutty Grama Panchayat is in violation of the siting
criteria fixed by the Pollution Control Board as canvassed
by the applicants.
2. Whether the ETP of the unit is functioning efficiently

and sufficient enough to prevent the pollution.
3. whether the effluent discharged into the chalakkudy

river satisfies the prescribed parameters
100
4. Whether the sludge generated by the industry is

discharged into chalakkudy river along with the trade
effluents discharged as alleged by the applicants.
5. Whether the sludge generated by the unit is

hazardous.
6. Whether the discharge of the effluent from the

industry has an adverse impact on the quality of water in
the chalakkudy river or ground water.
7.What are the steps, if any, to be taken by the industry

to make it pollution free.
71. Point No.1: The disputed Oessin unit of the
respondent M/S.Nitta Gelatin (I) Ltd., admittedly started its
commercial production in 1979 at Kathikudam in Kadukutty
Grama Panchayat. The industry is admittedly classified as
large scale red category industry by the Pollution Control
Board.
72. The argument of the learned senior counsel,
Mr.Mohan appearing for the applicants is that as per siting
criteria prescribed by the Board by Circular dated 09.08.2004

101
such an industry cannot be established within a minimum
distance of 100 meters from the residences. The argument is
that enormous number of residential houses are located within
the prohibited distance. Learned counsel is relying on the
report of the Environmental Engineer of the Board dated
12.06.2012 which shows that the Environmental Engineer
along with officials visited the company on 31.05.2012 and at
that time they measured the distance from the nearest house
and compound wall of the industry. As per the report
approximately 46 houses are existing within 100 meters from
the boundary of the company Learned counsel also argued
that even the report dated 12.06.2012, submitted before the
Ombudsman by the Engineer of the KSPCB, shows that there
are several houses close to the industry and as per the
Circular dated 09.08.2004 a large-scale red category industry
has to maintain a minimum distance of 100 meters from the
residences, the KSPCB should not have granted Consent or
renewed later and therefore, the functioning of the industry at
the site is clearly in violation of the siting criteria fixed by the
KSPCB.
102
73. The argument of the learned senior counsel Mr.
Anand, appearing for the industry is that the siting criteria
has no application for the unit/industry established prior to
09.08.2004 and therefore, based on the siting criteria fixed on
09.08.2004 , the functioning of the respondent company which
commenced its operation from 1979 onwards, cannot be
found to be in violation of the siting criteria. Learned senior
counsel also pointed out that even the Pollution Control Board
admitted this position in the report dated 12.07.2012.
74. Circular PCB/TAC/18/2004 dated 09.08.2004 issued
by the KSPCB shows that pursuant to the recommendations
submitted by the Committee, constituted to study and record
norms for siting criteria of the industries other than stone
crushers, were considered in the meeting of the Board held on
17.05.2004 and finalised the criteria. Thereafter, in the Board
meeting held on 23.07. 2004, it was decided to implement the
siting criteria: As per the circular, in the case of industry
having air pollution (including noise pollution) potential,
distance shall be measured from the main building or the

103
building housing the equipment operation or process of most
pollution potential and in case of industry having water
pollution potential, distance shall be measured from the major
waste water outlet. But in the case of industry having air and
water pollution potential, the shorter of the above said two
distances shall be taken. The minimum distance from the
nearest residence, in respect of a large-scale red category
industry is 100 meters. The Circular also shows that the said
criteria will be implemented with immediate effect and will be
reviewed after six months. Therefore, it cannot be disputed
that the siting criteria fixed under the said Circular came into
effect only with effect from 09.08.2004. The question is
whether the said siting criteria could be made applicable to the
industry which was already established and commenced its
operation before 09.08.2004.
75. The siting criteria which came into existence for the
first time on 09.08.2004, cannot be made applicable to an
industry which came into existence in the year 1979, is the
case of the 6th respondent industry. The Pollution Control Board

104
in their reply filed in Application No.305 of 2013 directly
addressed this issue as follows:
The siting criteria stipulated minimum

distance to be kept between the industry to
nearest residence and to nearest educational
institutions / court / public offices / hospital /
place of worship / community hall / similar
establishment (excluding other industry). Also
the siting criteria does not specify any
minimum distance from the industry to any
stream, wells and other water bodies. The
respondent company started functioning
since 1979 and the siting criteria came
into force with effect from 09.08.2004
onwards only. Hence the siting criteria
circular dated 09.08.2014 cannot be
made applicable to the respondent
company.(Bold letters supplied)
76. In the light of the discussions, it can only be found
that the siting criteria relied upon by the applicants to contend
that the industry of the respondent is functioning in violation
of the siting criteria fixed by the KSPCB in its circular dated
09.08.2004, is not applicable to the respondent industry and
therefore, it is held that the functioning of the industry is not

105
in violation of the siting criteria as contended by the
applicants. The point is answered accordingly.
77. Points 2 to 6: Before considering the disputed
points, it is necessary to appreciate the manufacturing process
of the respondent industry. The industry is engaged in
manufacturing of ossein, limed ossein, dicalcium phospate and
meat meal, and sterilized bone meal. As per the order of
Consent, capacity of each of the components is 13.3, 8.31,
40.5, 3.0 and 2 tonnes per day respectively. The raw materials
used are Crushed bone, HCl and hydrated lime. The unit is
purchasing crushed bones from different parts of India
including Aligarh in U.P. Though the report submitted by the
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in application No.412 of
2016 (PB) shows that the unit is also purchasing crushed bones
from slaughter houses, the industry is disputing it and there is
no material before the Tribunal to hold that it is purchasing the
crushed bones from the local slaughter houses. Anyway, that is
not a relevant aspect to be considered here. HCl is mainly
purchased from M/S.Travancore Cochin Chemicals Ltd., and

106
M/s. Chemplast Sanmar, Mettur, Tamil Nadu. The
manufacturing process comprises of three major parts. (1).
Pre-treatment of crushed bone (CB) (2). Acidulation and (3) Di
Calcium Phosphate Plant.
78. The raw crushed bone is fed into a hopper through
screw and belt conveyors. In that process sinews and bone
meal are separated using blower and rotary screen. Thereafter,
crushed bone is transferred to rotary washers for washing and
grease and bone meal are separated. After pre-treatment,
crushed bone is transferred to the acid bath for further
processing. The wash water from pre-treatment process is sent
to the ETP through open drain as organic waste water.
Crushed bone, thus transferred to acid bath is treated with 4%
concentrated HCl for about 5-7 days to convert bone into a
product called Ossein. After complete reaction, from crushed
bone to Ossein, the Ossein is taken into paddle washer for
washing and to remove free acid and other impurities are
removed. At the paddle wash by adding hydrated lime,
neutralisation washing is also done. After the neutralisation,

107
the Ossein is dried and then packed in PP bags and thereafter,
the packed bags are exported. For the production of Gelatin,
wet Ossein is pumped to liming plant where it is subjected to
lime treatment (0.5-1.0% lime solution) for 35-45 days and
treated lime as a whole in wet condition is transported to the
unit of the respondent located in Kakkanad, Kochi for
manufacturing Gelatin. The mono-calcium phosphate solution
generated during acidulation is pumped to DCP plant for
manufacture of Di-calcium Phosphate. The waste water from
paddle washer is sent to ETP as organic waste water in open
drain. The hot air required for Ossein drier is met through the
firewood boiler attached to stack of 30 m height. The mono-
calcium phosphate generated from acidulation process is
pumped to DCP plant and treated with hydrated lime solution
for conversion of mono calcium phosphate to Di-calcium
phosphate solution and the same is allowed to settle down to
obtain DCP slurry. The DCP slurry is filtered using Rotary Drum
Vacuum filter (RDV), dried, packed and stored in closed
storage yard. The filtrate and supernatant generated during
the process is sent to ETP through open drain as inorganic
waste water. The separated sinews and bone meal during the
108
pre-treatment process is converted into a product called meat
meal in two processes, i.e dry process and wet process. The
sinews and bone meal separated from crushed bone , which is
in dry form are packed and sold to local farmers for using as
meat meal. The bone meal separated during crushed bone
washing is cooked in a cooker with a steam and then dried and
finally sold to farmers as sterilised bone meal as poultry feed.
Therefore, the source of water is from Chalakudi river. As per
the Consent order, the industry is permitted to draw 3000 m3/
per day water from river Chalakudi. Admittedly, the industry
has installed flow meter to measure the water consumption at
the intake point in the industry premises and a log book also
was maintained therein by the industry to note the reading of
water consumption.
79. Waste water generated in the unit is categorised
as process waste water and domestic waste water. The major
sources of process waste water are wash water from pre-
treatment of crushed bone, wash water from Ossein washing ,
effluent from liming plant, supernatant from DCP precipitation

109
and filtrate from DCP filtration. In addition, cooling tower blow
down, boiler blow down, storm water collected in storm water
drain and water collected as leach from bio filters are also sent
to ETP and the existing ETP is of the capacity of 5000 m3/day.
It is designed to treat the effluent generated during the
manufacturing process. The waste water, as stated earlier,
generated in the unit, is segregated into organic stream and in-
organic stream. The organic stream includes waste water from
pre treatment of crushed bone, wash water from Ossein
washing, effluent from liming plant, boiler blow down, floor
washing and storm water. In-organic stream includes
Supernatant from DCP precipitation and filtrate from DCP
filtration. The organic waste water generated from Ossein plant
is transferred into ETP in a separate channel with gravity flow
and collected in grease trap tank for removal of grease
generated during washing. The overflow of effluent is collected
in effluent collection tank after the removal of grease and then
pumped to flash mixer where lime and alum are present to
neutralize the effluent followed by buffer tank. The online pH
meter is installed in buffer tank. The working of pH meter is
cross verified and found that the meter is working

110
satisfactorily. From the flash mixer, the effluent is pumped to
anaerobic digester 1 and 2 for degradation of organic
compounds in anaerobic condition. The biogas generated
during the oxidation is collected in biogas holder and used as
fuel for boiler. The overflow from anaerobic digester is
collected in Lamella Clarifier 1 & 2 for settlement of solid
particles. The overflow of lamella clarifier is pumped to flash
mixer followed by Flocculator(2), primary clarifier, Diffused
Air Flocculator(DAF 2) and from there, it is mixed along with
inorganic effluent and then sent to aeration tank for further
treatment. The sludge from primary clarifier is taken into
thickener followed by Rotary Vaccum Drier, filter press and
sludge drier. The final sludge is collected and packed in
polythene bags and sent to Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Facility (TSDF) at Kochi.
80. The waste water generated from DCP plant is being
termed as inorganic stream and the supernatant from DCP
precipitation and filtrate from DCP filtration is taken into DCP
effluent collection tank in separate channel and collected in

111
DCP effluent collection tank. The water from effluent collection
tank is pumped to flash mixer 1 & 2 followed by flocculator,
primary clarifier and Diffused Air Flocculator(DAF-1). The
treated effluent from DAF-1 is pumped to aeration tank along
with the treated effluent from DAF-2 for further treatment. The
sludge from primary clarifier is taken into thickener followed by
Rotary Vacuum Drier, filter press, and sludge drier. The final
sludge is collected and packed in polythene bags and sent to
the TSDF at Kochi. The effluent from DAF-1 and 2 are
pumped to aeration tank 1 & 2 for further oxidation. The
online D O meter and temperature meter are, admittedly,
installed at aeration tank. The effluent after aeration is
pumped to secondary clarifier followed by flash mixer,
flocculator, tertiary clarifier, sand filter and delay pond. The
effluent from delay pond is diluted with the back wash water of
sand filter (fresh water sand filter) and finally discharged into
Chalakkudy river. The industry has installed online pH meters
at different treatment points of ETP and five cameras are also
installed at ETP having direct access to the KSPCB for
surveillance purpose. The online pH meter is also installed at
the final outlet point in the premises of the industry before it is

112
discharged into the river. It is displayed at the main gate of the
industry for public access. The final treated effluent is being
carried to Chalakkudy river through closed concrete conduit of
900 m length having outer diameter of 18. The conduit is
buried 5 meter below the earth surface and submerged about 5
meter deep in the river. It is at that discharge point, the final
treated effluent is discharged into the river. As the outlet point
is at 5 meter depth in the river, it is not visible from outside.
81. While the question of pollution allegedly caused
by the 6th respondent industry was brought to the notice of
the Honble High Court of Kerala in WP (C) No.15795 of 2013,
by order dated 03.12.2013, the Honble High Court directed
CSIR NEERI, Nagpur to conduct a detailed study on the
pollution status with respect to the Air, Water and Solid waste
generated from the Ossein Division of M/s.Nitta Gelatin India
Ltd. including the adequacy and efficacy assessment of the
pollution control measures installed and to submit a report to
the KSPCB and the District Collector, Trichur with its

113
recommendations and specifying the time bound action plan
for implementation of the recommendations.
82. As directed, the CSIR-National Environmental
Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) conducted prima facie
assessment of the site and surrounding areas during 23rd
24th January, 2014. After assessing the industry site,
surrounding areas, habitat, existing stacks in the industry,
Existing Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) and wind blow pattern,
a detailed programme for sampling of emissions, odour,
surface and ground water, solid waste/sludge and soil and
strategy for monitoring of air quality, assessment of ETP and
green belt assessment within the industry premises, were
designed and sampling locations were identified. 17 Members
comprising 10 Scientists and 7 Project Assistants conducted the
study and submitted a report on May, 2014. The report shows
that the quantity and characteristics of the process effluents
from Ossein and DCP plants were evaluated for a period of
three days, namely, February 13th, - 14th , 14th-15th and 15th -
16th 2014. The Ossein and DCP Process effluents were also
sampled for characterisation. Hourly samples were collected at

114
inlet of flash mixture and composited for 12 hours, and 24
hours for three days. The concentration of various physico-
chemical parameters in process effluents including heavy
metals were monitored and presented under Table 10.1
appended to the report. The high strength (in terms of organic
load) Ossein process effluent is acidic to neutral in nature with
high organic and inorganic contents including oil and greases
and total kjeldhal nitrogen (TKN), Dicalcium phosphate
process effluent was also acidic to near neutral in nature with
low concentration of organic matter and TKN but with high
concentration of inorganic materials. Low organic strength di-
calcium phosphate process effluent was found suitable for
diluting the high organic strength for biological treatment. The
combined effluent of Ossein and DCP process units were also
assessed by them for characterization. The hourly samples of
Ossein and DCP process effluents were mixed in the ratio of 1.0
: 35 to 1.0 : 45 based on flow monitored at inlet of flash
mixer. The concentration of various parameters in the
combined effluent were also furnished along with report under
Table 10.1. NEERI considered the adequacy assessment of
effluent treatment plant under Clause 10.2 of page 35 of the

115
report. It shows that performance assessment of the ETP was
carried out through flow monitoring of Ossein and DCP effluent
streams and analysis of composite samples collected at
various stages of the treatment. It is shown in Plan 10.1 of the
report. Samples were collected from the various stages of the
treatment. Samples were collected hourly and composited for
12 hours and 24 hours during the said period of February 13th
to 15th, 2014. Samples collected were placed directed into
acid-rinsed polyethylene bottles with no filtration. Samples
collected were analysed for physico-chemical parameters
including heavy metals as per the methodology prescribed for
the examination of water and waste water.
83. Measurement of pH was conducted online and
analysis of suspended solids (SS) total dissolved solids (TDS),
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD), Ammonical Nitrogen dissolved oxygen (DO) mixed
liquid suspended solids (MLSS) and mixed liquid volatile
suspended solids (MLVSS) were performed in the onsite
laboratory. Preservation samples were taken to the Laboratory
at NEERI, Nagpur and analysed for the rest of the parameters

116
including heavy metals. The physico-chemical characteristics
of the composite samples at various stages of the treatment
are shown in Table 10.2 of the report. The major physico-
chemical characteristic parameters including heavy metals,
sand filter treatment, final treated effluent of ETP conformed
to the stipulated limits for discharge into inland surface waters
as per Consent prescribed by KSPCB as shown in table 10.5 of
the report. To assess the impact of discharge of treated
effluent from ETP on the aquatic life of the receiving water
body, treated effluent samples from ETP being discharged into
Chalakkudy river, were collected and subjected to static fish
bioassay test. That test was conducted in the laboratory at
room temperature using Zebra fish as test fish species, as
prescribed by the CPCB, New Delhi in the guidelines (Method
of Determination of Waste Water Toxicity for fish) That
method was also adopted by the Bureau of Indian Standard
as Bioassay Method of Evaluating acute toxicity of industrial
effluents and waste water. During the test, no mortality was
observed for control. The test result of the as received
treated effluent samples from the ETP without any dilution, also
shows no mortality after exposure for 96 hours and the fishes

117
survived throughout the exposure time indicating that as
received samples were non-toxic to fish life. Based on these
results of NEERI, the following were observed:
The ETP was operational at an average flow rate

(combined effluent) in the range 2764-2844 m/d during
monitoring vis--vis the maximum flow of 3000 m/d as
per the KSPCB Consent. Thus, the ETP was operational at
92.1-94.8% of the Consent flow.
Physico-chemical characteristics in terms of the major
parameters of the final treated effluent being discharged
into Chalakudy river as observed during the monitoring
vis--vis the KSPCB stipulated norms, are as follows:
Parameters Magnitude KSPCB norms as per

Final treated Consent for discharge
effluent into ISW
pH 6.4-7.1 5.5-9.0
SS 60-72 100
COD 102-108 250
BOD (3d- 22-26 30
27C)
Ammonia-N 37.6-42.8 50
TKN 54-66 100
Phosphates 0.29-0.42 5
(x10-1) as P
Oil & grease 6.0-10.0 10
The concentration of the physicochemical parameters in

the final treated effluent from ETP conformed to the
stipulated limits of the KSPCB for discharge into Inland
Surface Waters as per Consent with respect to all the
parameters.
118
The heavy metals concentration in the final treated

effluent from ETP was in very low concentration of below
detectable limits.
The result of the static fish bioassay test of the as
received treated effluent samples from ETP without any
dilution, had no mortality after 96 h of exposure time
indicating that the treated effluent samples were non-
toxic to fish.
As observed during monitoring the dosing of coagulant
and coagulant aid was random and not based on
treatability optimization for chemical precipitation at
primary stage of treatment. The quantity of lime, alum
and polyelectrolyte usage in primary treatment are as
follows:
Particular Dosage, mg/l Quantity, kg/d

- Lime ~500 ~1500
- Alum ~150 ~450
- Polyelectrolyte ~1.5 ~4.5
The quantity of chemical sludge generated from primary

treatment was in the range 200-230 ml/l.
Online pH meters are not installed at primary and tertiary
level of treatment where alum is used as coagulant. Alum
works as an effective coagulant agent in a narrow pH
range 6.5-7.8. Hence, it is imperative to install an online
pH meter in chemical treatment unit.
The weirs provided in clarifiers are not uniform which may
lead to short circuiting of flow and formation of dead
pockets, resulting in poor clarification of treated effluent.
The operational hydraulic retention time (HRT), overflow
rate (OFR), weir loading (WL) and performance of the
primary clarifier with respect to SS, COD, BOD and
phosphate removal were as follows:
Parameter Existin CPHEEO Removal efficiency+, %

119
s g *
Phospha
HRT, h 6.6-6.7 2.5-3.5 SS COD BOD
te
OFR, 11.40- 89. 78.
3 2 25-50 76.5
m /m /d 11.62 1- 5- 90.2-
-
WL, 35.6- 90. 81. 93.6
3 125 78.3
m /d.m 36.7 6 8
*CPHEEO, 2012; +Bases on 12 and 24 hours
monitoring.
HRT in primary clarifier was high (6.6-6.7 h) vis--vis the

design criteria. High HRT may lead to development of
septic condition due to high organic fraction and thereby
may affect the performance of the downstream biological
process.
The pH of feed to aeration tank was observed to be
alkaline (range: 7.2-8.7) rather than the desirable range
(6.8-7.2) necessary for effective bio-oxidation.
The BOD: Nitrogen: Phosphate (B:N:P) ratio in aeration
tanks was in the range 100:14.5:0.20 to 100:15.3:0.30
as against a standard requirement of 100:5:1 for effective
aerobic bio-oxidation. Thus, effluent routed to aeration
tank was deficient in phosphates which may affect
metabolism of bacteria and lead to non-optimal growth
rate.
The aeration tanks are provided with seven surface
aerators in addition to diffused aeration. The tanks are
completely covered from the top to control odour emission
(Plate 10.03).
The oxygen requirement for oxidation of organics based
on BOD concentration as monitored was in the range
2048-2746 KgO2/d. The power requirement to meet the
oxygen demands through surface aerators alone would be
in the range, 115-155 HP and through blower would be in
the range, 100-135 HP, respectively.
120
The total HP of 7 aerators provided is 115 HP and that of

the compressor is 100 HP. However, the power efficiency
(PE) and actual torque at shaft of the seven aerators in
operation as estimated at site were lower than the rated
capacity (Table 10.6).
The PE of the seven operational aerators was in the range
of 48.1-66.8% as against the rated capacities and the
actual torque at shaft was in the range 59.2-83.3 Nm as
against the rated torque of 63.0-89.1Nm. Similarly, the PE
of the compressor was also lower (51.1%).
Thus, the low DO concentration in the aeration tanks
could also be attributed to the low power efficiencies of
the existing aerators and compressor.
The low power efficiencies of the surface aerators are due
to the excessive wear and tear of conveyor V-belts
causing reduction in torque at shaft of the surface
aerators. On the other hand, the low PE of the compressor
is mainly due to non-optimal control of air flow and
pressure.
It was observed that alum was dosed at the outlet of
aeration tank and polyelectrolyte was added in the
secondary clarifier to improve settling of biomass in
secondary clarifier. The quantity of alum and
polyelectrolyte addition was ~150 and ~6 kg/d,
respectively. Due to chemical dosing the sludge from the
secondary clarifier was rather heterogenous in nature than
being completely biological. Recycle of such heterogenous
sludge (chemical and biological) in aeration tank severely
affects biological activity. This was evident from the visual
appearance of biomass that appeared discuss and thick as
floccculant polymer solution. The whitish colour probably
also indicated the presence of excess polyelectrolyte in
the aeration tanks, which was dense rather than flocculant
and whitish in colour due to presence of unreacted
coagulant/ coagulant aid.
121
The MLSS and MLVSS concentrations in the aeration tank

I under the existing operation were in the range 7969-
9320 and 2330-2568 mg/l, respectively, whereas the
concentrations in aeration tank II were in the range 8450-
10600 and 3250-3300 mg/l, respectively.
The ratio of MLVSS and MLSS was in the range 0.29-0.34
as against the design ratio of 0.8-0.85. This is indicative
of the presence of inorganic fraction in the biomass from
aeration tanks due to chemical dosing in aeration tank
and secondary clarifier thereby resulting in ineffective bio-
oxidation.
The dissolved oxygen concentration as mentioned in both
the aeration tanks was nil. This may be attributed to two
main reasons. Firstly, as the aeration tanks are
completely covered (Plate 1) hence the atmospheric
oxygen transfer was negligible, and secondly, oxygen
transfer efficiency of the surface aerator was low.
The design parameters, namely food of micro-organisms
ratio (F/M) and volumetric loading rate (VLR) considering
both aeration tanks under existing operating conditions
vis--vis design criteria were as follows:
Parameters Aeration tank
Existing+ Design Criteria
-1
F/M, d 0.33-0.45 0.2-0.6
3
VLR, kgBOD/m .d 0.69-1.26 0.3-1.6
Microscopic analysis of biomass from aeration tanks

reveals presence of filamentous bacteria. Details of
species identified and their characteristics are given in
Table 10.7. The identified species typically were not
responsible for foam formation in aeration tanks. The
foaming in aeration tanks may be due to the presence of
high concentration of oil & grease (140-180 mg/l) in
primary treated effluent being routed for bio-oxidation.
To determine the sludge volume index (SVI) and sludge
setting rate of the sludge from aeration tanks sludge
122
setting studies were carried out in one litre. The SVI and
sludge setting rate as monitored were as follows:
Particulars Aeration tank

I II
Sludge Volume Index 31.5-36.8 31.4-36.8
(ml/g)
Sludge settling rate (m/h) 0.21-0.24 0.23-0.26
Bio-logical sludge with SVI value in the range 80-100 ml/g

has good settle ability. The low SVI value and high settling
rate indicate presence of chemical sludge and/or
mineralized sludge in aeration tanks.
HRT, OFR and WL of secondary clarifier including
performance of the biological treatment with respect to
SS, COD and BOD removals as monitored were as follows:
Parameters Existing CPHEEO* Removal efficiency+, %

HRT, h 7.0-7.2 1.5-2.0 SS COD BOD
OFR,
8.4-8.6 8-15
m3/m2/d 22.6- 39.1- 70.3-
WL, 35.6- 25.4 40.6 73.1
3 125
m /d.m 36.7
monitoring.
High HRT in secondary clarifier is attributed to over design

of the unit operation. High HRT may lead to septic
condition and deteriorating the quality of clarified effluent.
The solid settling rate in secondary clarifier is maximum
during the first 2.0-2.5 h of settling and thereafter
decreases considerably. Hence, longer retention period do
not provide much advantage, and instead may lead to
sludge000 bulking.
123
The dosage of alum and polyelectrolyte for chemical

precipitation at tertiary stage of treatment was ~300 kg/d
and ~3 kg/d, respectively.
HRT, OFR, WL and performance of the tertiary treatment
with respect to SS, COD and BOD removals as monitored
were as follows:
Paramete0 Existing CPHEEO Removal efficiency+, %

0rs *
17.0-
HRT, hr 1.5-2.0 SS COD BOD
17.4
OFR,
3.4-3.5 8-15
m3/m2/d 68.7- 74.9- 68.1-
WL, 27.5- 70.8 76.3 70.6
125
m3/d.m 28.3
monitoring.
HRT in tertiary clarifier was high (17.0-17.4 h) compared

to the design criteria. High HRT may lead to septic
condition and may result in biofouling of the downstream
sand filter.
Performance of the pressure sand filter with respect to SS,
COD & BOD removal efficiencies based on 12 and 24 h
monitoring were in the range 5.1-6.8, 9.1-11.1 and 4.9-
5.8% respectively. Performance of pressure of the media
to be followed as per instruction laid down in the
operational manual.
No separate energy meter is provided for effluent
treatment plant. A separate energy meter exclusively for
ETP would facilitate monitoring of power consumption by
the regulatory authorities to ensure continuous operation
of the ETP.
124
84. NEERI also suggested mitigation measures for
improved and sustained performance of the ETP at peak flow,
which include mixing facility of adequate capacity must be
provided in collection tank of DCP process effluent for proper
equalisation of the effluent as the manufacturing process are
batch operated, which will ensure flow of equalised effluent
into downstream units facilitating ease of coagulant dosing
and avoiding shock loading, online pH meter must be installed
at the primary, secondary and tertiary stages of treatment to
ensure maintenance of optimum pH for effective chemical
precipitation and bio-oxidation, the dosage of coagulant and
coagulant aid at primary and tertiary stages of treatment
should be optimized based on the concentration of major
pollutants in the feed through regular jar test (treatability
studies) facilitating optimal chemical consumption for
effective chemical precipitation and consequent minimal
chemical sludge generation, the coagulant and coagulant aid
must be properly closed in the flash mixer with rapid mixing
at 100-120 rpm for 1-2 minutes followed by slow mixing at
30 rpm for 15-120 minutes in Flocculator to achieve effective
coagulation/flocculation, regular de-sludging from the primary

125
clarifier must be practised to prevent escape/carry-over of
suspended solids in the clarified effluent, dosing of coagulant
and coagulant aid in feed to secondary clarifier must be
discontinued, as recycle of sludge from clarifier to aeration tank
will result in building of chemical sludge in aeration tanks,
efforts to be made for development of active biomass in
aeration tanks for effective bio-oxidation and achieving
optimum removal of soluble organics, the pH of primary
treated effluent routed to aeration tank must be maintained in
the range 6.8-7.4 and dissolved oxygen must be regularly
monitored and maintained in the range 2.0 2.5 mg/l to
ensure optimum environmental conditions for proper growth
of microorganisms for effective bio-oxidation, the bio-
degradable organics to nutrient ratio of 100 : 5.1 must be
maintained in aeration tanks for effective bio-oxidation
through supplement of nutrients, if required, the torque at
shaft of the aerators must be improved through regular
replacement of conveyor V-belts and predictive maintenance
of the assembly to enhance the efficiency of the existing
surface aerators, in case of the compressor, the air discharge
rate must be regulated to achieve improved efficiency, the

126
covered roof in the aeration tank may be partly removed to
allow transfer of atmospheric oxygen into the liquid during
aeration to improve the desired dissolved oxygen concentration
or both the aeration tanks must be provided with diffused
aeration instead of surface aeration, bio-sludge recycle and
wastage from secondary clarifier must be optimally practised
based on design to ensure desired MLSS concentration in
aeration tanks and improve the sludge growth rate, the
combined effluent has high concentration of TKN which
eventually converts to Ammonia-N and the development of
active biomass in aeration tanks will facilitate removal of
ammonia through bio-oxidation, weirs must be refurbished in
primary, secondary and tertiary clarifiers to maintain design
weir loading rate for facilitating uniform outflow velocity to
prevent short circuiting and avoid formation of dead pockets ,
thereby ensuring effective clarification in the industry, sand
media filters must be backwashed at regular intervals as per
the operational manual guidelines to ensure optimum efficiency
of the filtration units. And further, the management must
consider the feasibility for further reducing the effluent
generation through the plant process improvement thereby

127
decreasing the quantity of effluent discharge into the river as
at that time around 45.8% of waste water alone was generated
from process units is recycled/reused within the plant in
various processes, as at that time pH, SS, BOD, COD,
Ammonia Nitrogen, Phosphate and oil and grease are analysed
for the final treated effluent alone , which is finally discharged
into the Chalakkudy river, regular analysis of the major
parameters at various stages of treatment was recommended
to ensure performance check of the various unit processes in
the ETP. Equipping laboratory with proper instrumentation
facilities namely, Jar test apparatus, double beam
spectrophotometer and double distillation unit, TKN digester
with ammonia distillation assembly were suggested.
Maintenance of proper records in the form of printed log books
of quantity of waste water generated, chemical and energy
consumption, laboratory analysis for the ETP performance,
quantity of sludge generated and schedule followed for recycle
of biological sludge were suggested as this will facilitate proper
operation and maintenance of the ETP and to facilitate
monitoring of power consumption by the regulatory authorities

128
providing of separate energy meter was recommended to
ensure that ETP is continuously operated.
85. To assess the impact of the effluent discharged on
the water quality of Chalakkudy river, a sampling programme
was prepared and considered the river flow pattern. River
water was sampled at 10 locations spread over the river stretch
starting from Vynthala pump house 2.51 km upstream of
water intake Well of the industry to - 17.18 km downstream
of treated effluent discharge location of the industry at
Kanakkankadve barrage. The total river stretch of 20.3 km
was covered to assess the quality of water in the river.
Sampling was carried out at the centre of the river using a
motor boat and also at both the banks at few locations
downstream of the treated effluent discharge location. The
results are given in Table 10.8 and 10.9 of the report. Study
was also conducted on aquatic biodiversity.
86. So also, to assess the impact of the industrial
activity on ground water in the vicinity of the industry,
sampling locations were identified and samples were collected

129
and ground water samples were collected from open dug wells
that are used in residential blocks in the nearby villages
around the industry. Detailed physico-chemical characteristics
including heavy metals of ground water samples collected from
the villages are quantitatively analysed along with the
acceptable limit and permissible limit of Indian Standard
Drinking Water Specification and shown in table 10.16
appended to the report. Water samples were also collected
from the paddy field adjacent to the industrial site at
Perunthode channel, pond opposite to M/s.Kirupa bone
industries and the ponds in low lying area and dumping site
within the industry premises. The detailed physico-chemical
characteristics including heavy metals of the water samples
collected from various locations are furnished in tale 10.18
appended to the report. Based on the study, it was observed
that the characteristics of surface water collected from
Chalakkudy river from 2 km upstream of water intake Well of
the industry to 17.18 km downstream of treated effluent
discharge location do not indicate high concentration of any
major pollutants. The river water quality of the downstream
treated effluent from the industry indicates that no major

130
impact is observed in the characteristics of river water with
respect to major physico-chemical parameters as per Drinking
Water Standards Specification.
87. Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index (SWI) values of the
river water samples based on composition of phytoplankton
found varied from 3.11 to 3.55, which indicate the level of
plankton biodiversity with minimum impact of organic pollution
or adverse factors for plankton growth. The Palmer Pollution
Index (PPI) of 20 or more in a sample which is an indicator of
organic pollution was ruled out as the PPI values as estimated
and as per the samples collected from various locations varied
in the range 4-10 indicating absence of organic pollution
(table 10.10 of the report) SWI values for zooplankton ranging
between 1 and 3 are believed to indicate semi productivity of
a water body while the values above 3 are considered the
minimum impact of pollution or adverse factors as SWI values
varied from 3.01 to 3.65 which indicate good level of plankton
biodiversity with minimum impact of organic pollution or
adverse factors for plankton grown. The characteristics of

131
ground water sampled from dug Wells located in the villages
around the industry do not indicate the presence of any major
pollutants in concentrations exceeding the permissible limit of
Drinking Water Standards. The characteristics of the water
samples collected from various locations identified by the
members associated with the ongoing agitation against the
industry do not indicate the presence of any major pollutant
in concentrations that can attribute to any discharge/disposal
of waste from the industrial activity. The waste generated were
inventorized to find out (Hazardous Waste Management
Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules. The sinews, a
fibrous tissue binding muscle and bone are generated as
waste during the pre-treatment of crushed bones and are
collected in gunny bags and either converted into a value
added poultry feed product, namely, meat meal or sold as
manure to manufacturers as it is a good source of nutrient
supplement. The fine dust of bones present in crushed bones
separated during pre-treatment of crushed bones, is collected
in gunny bags and either sold as manure or processed into a
value added product called as meat meal, which is a good
nutrient supplement and it is also sold to the poultry feed

132
manufacturers. The effluent generated during the manufacture
of various products is collected in an equalization tank and
treated in a three stage ETP. It was found that the primary
ETP sludge is sun dried and collected in polypropylene bags.
The primary ETP sludge is termed as nutrisoil and sold as soil
nutrient, supplement to the compost/manure manufacturers.
The secondary ETP sludge is subjected to biological treatment
which comprises of aeration tank followed by secondary
clarifier. A part of bio sludge settled in the secondary clarifier
is recycled to the aeration tank to maintain the MLSS
concentration and the excess sludge is subject to de-watering
using filter process. The de-watered sludge is discarded as
secondary ETP sludge. It is collected and stored in
polypropylene bags and used for compost manufacturing and
the remaining product is sold as manure to the manufacturers.
The wood ash used as fuel in the furnace to meet the
requirement of heat energy for drying of Ossein and DCP, is
collected in polypropylene bags and used for composting within
the industry. Spent/used oil generated from various mechanical
equipments is collected in impermeable containers and stored
in a covered shed. E-wastes of various categories generated

133
from electrical/electronic equipments, is periodically sold to
KSPCB authorized agency. On an average four number of filter
cloths are discarded as waste in every two months from the
drum filter and filter press. It is stored and disposed of
periodically.
88. Based on analysis of various solid waste/sludge
generated by the industry, it was observed that the sinews,
bone meal waste, are non hazardous as provided under the
Hazardous Waste (Handling, Management and Tran-boundary
Movement) Rules, 2008. So also, on the primary ETP sludge, it
was observed that on the process details of generation and
the overall analysis, it may be concluded that the Primary ETP
sludge does not contain any hazardous constituent and
therefore, classified as non hazardous waste as per the
Movement) Rules, 2008. The waste however, has a very high
pH and needs to be managed in an environmentally sound
manner to prevent contamination of land and water resources.
Based on the analysis of the secondary ETP sludge, it was
observed that on the overall analysis it may be concluded

134
that the secondary ETP sludge does not contain any hazardous
waste as per the Hazardous Waste (Handling, Management and
Tran-boundary Movement) Rules, 2008. The sludge, however,
has high pH value and needs to be managed in an
environmentally sound manner to prevent contamination of
land and water resources. The waste generated by using the
wood as fuel, it was observed that the wood ash generated by
using the wood as fuel, is also non hazardous waste. On the
analysis of the samples collected at dump site adjacent to
ETP , it was observed that Based on the visual inspection and
the overall analysis it may be concluded that the dump
material does not contain any hazardous constituent and is
therefore, classified as non-hazardous waste as the
Movement) Rules, 2008. The dumped material has a very high
pH value and needs to be managed in an environmentally
sound manner to prevent contamination of land and water
resources. Based on the analysis of the representative
samples collected to check the presence of hazardous
constituent, it was observed that based on the overall
analysis, it may be concluded that the compost does not

135
contain any hazardous constituent. The impact of waste
dumped on open land was also considered by NEERI. It was
reported that the analysis of soil samples collected from dump
site conform various physico-chemical parameters and its
comparison with control soil sample indicates that there is no
significant and adverse change in the characteristics of soil at
the dump. In addition, the characteristics of the soil samples
from the paddy field adjacent to the industry and also from
the excavated land on northern side of the industry , adjacent
to abandoned roof tile industry, do not indicate any major
change in characteristics compared to control sample. Still, as
a mitigating measure, NEERI suggested after observing that
the industry does not generate any hazardous waste from the
process and only hazardous waste generated by the industry is
used/spent oil which is generated from various mechanical
equipments. Considering the high pH value of the some of the
wastes such as primary and secondary ETP sludge as well as
low pH value of wood ash, it was recommended not to dump or
store these wastes directly on land to avoid any possibility of
ground water contamination.

136
89. On the aspect of air environment, it was reported
that the dust and gaseous pollutants from the industrial unit
are collected, treated wherever required and emitted through
stacks attached to various processes. The concentration of
particulate matter emission from Ossein (162.3 175.2
mg/Nm3) furnace hot air generator, as monitored, marginally
exceeded the regulatory limit (150 mg/ Nm3). It was also
observed that as the data was based on short term monitoring,
the high concentration observed may be only due to blowing
operation being carried out in the hot air generator during the
stack monitoring. But the particulate matter control at source
needs attention. The Particulate matter emission from stack
attached to DCP manufacturing unit conformed to the
prescribed limit fixed by KSPCB. It was, however, noted that
emission limits for Sulphur di-oxide and Hydrogen sulphide
from stack have not been stipulated in the Consent Order.
The average concentration of particulate matter (PM10 & PM2.5)
monitored on 24 hourly basis in the ambient air within the
industry premises and in the surrounding areas, were found to
be within the prescribed National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. The Ambient Air Quality in reference to the

137
parameters namely, SO2, NO2, H2S and NH3 are within the
industry premises and surrounding areas were also found
within the norms prescribed by the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. The concentration of the parameters,
namely, SO2, NO2, NO, NH3 and H2S installed by the
management within the industry continuously displayed
through an electronic display board. An online Ambient Air
Quality monitoring station has been installed by the
management within the industry premises. The odour
concentration as monitored at various locations was reported
as very low. Lower concentrations were observed at location in
the surrounding areas of the industry premises. But it was also
observed that the odour as monitored was found higher during
early morning and evening hours compared to day time and
this can be due to different meteorological conditions that
prevail during those periods of the day. High odour
concentrations were detected at the manufacturing points,
namely, cooking and separation of dry sinews, wet bone meal,
pre-treatment of crushed bone, acidulation of crushed bone
and DCP precipitation and filtration.

138
90. Based on the findings, NEERI suggested the following
recommendations:
1. To control odour emission from crushed bone (CB)

charging area, it is recommended to provide an
enclosure for the charging process of CB. The
existing godown admeasuring 45 m x 11 m with
6.2 m height along the length and 8.2 m along the
width (Figure 14.1). The existing CB charging
equipment may be relocated within the enclosure
with necessary modifications and provided with
blower and discharge duct connected to a new
scrubber system or a biofilter. The enclosed space
would be around 4428 m3 with the existing blower
of 12000 m3/h capacity. However, it is
recommended to enhance the blower capacity by
providing an additional blower of 30000 m3/h
capacity to achieve improved air circulation. The
blower discharge should be scrubbed through
installation of a new scrubber system having
capacity of 12000 m3/h, or treated in a biofilter
designed for an adequate capacity.
2. In addition, the bay on the Eastern side of the

godown must be isolated/ separated by providing
a partition wall. This will reduce the storage space
of the godown, and restrict storing of CB on the
Eastern side of the godown and thereby control
dust and odour emissions on the Eastern side of
the industry which is adjacent to the boundary
wall of M/s NGIL. The schematic of the proposed
modification of the godown is presented in Figure
14.1.
139
3. Similarly to control odour emission in acidulation

of CB and DCP precipitation & filtration process
areas, the ambient air from these process areas
may be treated using the existing biofilter.
Ambient air from these areas may be routed to the
existing biofilter by providing ducts and blowers to
mitigate odour emission in these areas.
In addition, the following recommendations must be

judiciously implemented in a time bound manner (Table 14.1)
for sustainable environmental management:
4. Use of low ash and low sulphur contents fuel in

furnaces and boilers must be practiced for control
of PM and SO concentration at sources.
5. The ossein furnace hot air generator emissions

marginally exceeded the regulatory limits for
particulate matter. Though the monitoring data is
based on short term assessment, feasible
corrective measures are needed to ensure
emission within the norms on a sustainable basis.
6. The present practice of spraying deodorant in the

process unit areas where odour emissions are
higher must be continued to control the odour
problem in and around the industry premises.
7. The chemical treatment unit process of ETP

comprising coagulation-flocculation needs to be
operated effectively to optimize the treatment
efficiency. Since the chemical treatment is pH
dependent. It is recommended to provide online
pH meter in reaction tanks ensuring maintenance
of optimum pH for effective precipitation of the
140
pollutants and thereby reducing the consumption

of chemicals and subsequent sludge generation.
8. Similarly, the performance of the biological

treatment needs to be improved. The efficiency of
the surface aerators must be enhanced through
regular maintenance and in case of the
compressor the air discharge rate must be
maintained as per the recommendation of the
manufacturer. This will ensure optimum oxygen
supply thereby facilitating proper biomass growth
leading to improvement in bio-oxidation of the
organics. In addition, the present practice of
adding coagulant/ coagulant aid in biological
process for improving sludge settleability must be
discontinued. This will facilitate development of
active biomass in the system for effective bio-
oxidation on a sustainable basis.
9. Regular backwashing of sand filters must be

ensured for optimum performance of the sand
filtration unit, and if necessary the media must be
replaced with proper media size depending on the
size of the suspended fraction.
10. The final treated effluent characteristics from

ETP conform to the limits of all the seven
stipulated parameters of the KSPCB Consent.
However, the concentration of the chloride in the
final treated effluent being discharged is higher
than that in the receiving water body. The KSPCB
has given Consent to M/s. NGIL vide letter dated
20.09.2009 excluding the chloride parameter as
long as the river water quality meets the Indian
Standard Drinking Water Specifications (IS
141
10500:2012) at the point of discharge.

Considering the concentration of chloride in the
treated effluent being directly discharged into the
river, it is recommended that M/s NGIL must
judiciously monitor fortnightly the chloride and
TDS parameters in the river water especially
during lean flow periods. If any time the
concentration of the referred parameters in the
river water exceeds the acceptable limits of the
Indian Standard Drinking Water Specifications, M/s
NGIL must immediately ensure necessary measure
to bring down the concentration of the referred
parameters in the treated effluent being
discharged by increasing the flow ratio of polishing
pond effluent to delay pond effluent.
11. M/s NGIL must submit the analyses report on

river water quality to the KSPCB every fortnight.
12. As being practiced flexible pipe must not be

used for conveyance of treated/untreated
wastewater from one unit of the ETP to another,
and instead should be replaced by rigid pipes.
13. The industry management must also consider

the feasibility for further reducing the effluent
generation through in plant process improvement
there by decreasing the quantity of effluent
discharge into the river.
14. During river water sapling along the 20.03 km

stretch of river Chalakudy, weed growth was
observed along the banks of the river restricting
the free flow in the river and thereby resulting in
water stagnation and scum formation on the water
142
surface. M/s NGIL must undertake regular cleaning

of weeds specially near the treated effluent
discharge pipeline in the river to ensure free flow
of water at the banks, and thereby mitigating the
possibility of anaerobicity at the banks of the river.
15. The present study of greenbelt developed

within the industry premises covers 22.72% of the
total area of the industry premises. Besides this,
an additional 2.42% of the area is also being
developed as green belt. The industrial area also
possesses natural vegetation with wild climbers
and sparse trees of coconut on 8.82% of the total
area. An additional area of 0.37 ha is
recommended for further development as green
belt at locations as presented in Figure 12.1.
16. Efforts must be made to develop greenbelt of

adequate width and density along the boundary
wall and within the industry premises depending
on the availability of space at the recommended
locations to mitigate the effect of odour emission.
17. New trees belonging to species Casuarina

equisetifolia have been planted 3-4 months earlier
on the Eastern side of the crushed bone godown
and have attained height of 1-2 meter. These
trees can be replaced by tree species with broad
leaves as listed in Table 12.2.
18. New green belt of 10 meter width is

recommended on the North East of industry
premises (low lying area) and near Smruti Vanam
as per the development plan presented in section
143
12.3. The green belt plan is designed considering

the climate conditions and soil type.
19. Aegal marmelos, Terminalia catappa, Tectona

grandis, Azadirachta indica, Artocarpus
heterophyllus and Mangifera indica are the species
growing well in the local environment and also
possesses the large biomass with broader leaf
area. Therefore, these species are recommended
for developing new green belt areas.
20. Utmost care must be ensured to achieve

optimum growth of the trees for an effective
greenbelt development within the industry
premises.
21. The industry should also improve the green

belt cover through plantation of high foliage trees
around the periphery of CB godown and other point
sources of odour emission to act as barrier for
controlling the secondary fugitive emissions in the
areas within the industry.
22. M/s NGIL must ensure judicious

implementation of the recommendation made by
the Technical Expert Committee which is still not
complied within the targeted time frame.
23. An Environmental Management Cell must be

created with either a chemical engineer or an
environmental engineer as In-charge of the cell
144
who will directly report to the Unit Head. This will

facilitate independent responsibility of the cell for
effective / efficient and sustainable pollution
control leading to better environmental
management of the industrial activities.
24. M/s NGIL must also be committed to go

beyond compliance through continuous
improvement in management practices, and
delineating a road map for progressive renovation
in environment management system.
91. Pursuant to the report, the Kerala State Pollution
Control Board (KSPCB) accepted the recommendations and
issued the following directions to be complied with by the
industry as per letter dated 24.09.2014.
1. Cameras are to be provided in the Effluent Treatment

Plant area for viewing the effluent treatment plant
operations from District Office at Thrissur, Regional Office
at Ernakulam & from the Head Office of Pollution Control
Board.
2. The odour of treated effluent is to be assessed.
3. Oil and grease trap is to be provided as oil and grease in

effluent treatment plant is high.
4. Anaerobic disaster is to be installed before aeration tank

so as to reduce the generation of sludge, to reduce the
dosing rate of chemicals and to produce energy.
145
5. Treated effluent is to be reused to the maximum extent.
6. The storage area of godown is to be partitioned for

controlling smell problem.
7. Acidity in fumes is to be ascertained as there is chance of

microbes in biofilter being affected.
8. Arrangement shall be made to provide a minimum

required dissolved oxygen content in the aeration tank &
for the proper functioning of aeration tank.
9. TCLP analysis is to be done for soil and sediment samples.
10. Facility shall be provided to maintain / adjust pH in

Effluent Treatment Plant units.
11. Periodical maintenance of sand filter is to be

ensured.
12. Environment Management Cell shall be strengthened by
posting an Engineer exclusively for the purpose.
13. There shall not be any flexible pipes in the factory. The
Environmental Engineer, District Office, Thrissur shall
ensure this.
92. Even earlier, based on the complaint received
against the industry, the Government appointed an eight
member Expert Committee headed by Smt.Dr.B.Lakshmikutty,

146
Head of Department (Chemical Engineering), Government
Engineering College, Thrissur as per G.O.(Rt) No.29/2011/10
dated 27.01.2011. The Expert Committee after inspection and
verification suggested 13 recommendations to be implemented
by the industry. As per the G.O.(Rt) No.1376/2011/10 dated
03.11.2011, the Government accepted the study report and
directed the company to implement the following 13
directions:
1. Reduce water consumption by using

appropriate technology and water recycling
method.
2. Construction of new biogas plant.
3. Improve the efficiency of DCP bag filters by
installing additional bag filters.
4. Stoppage of semi-dried solid waste
transportation to outside.
5. Execution of the directives from the PCB and
complete adherence to pollution control norms.
6. Prevention of order from the company using
modern technology.
7. Take sincere steps for the benefit and
upbringing of local people and there by achieve
their goodwill.
8. Formation of green belt along the company
boundary.
9. Prevention of odour related pollution in the
area.
147
10. Consider continuous monitoring system for

assessing the smell in the surrounding.
11. Formation of monitoring committee
comprising local body members, trade union
members, management and health
department.
12. Take steps to remove the apprehensions
regarding outlet water discharge system.
13. Cleaning of Chalakudy river to remove the
sediments from the river bed.
93. Thereafter, a meeting was convened by the
Chief Minister of the State on 07.12.2011 wherein the NGIL
Action Council members, officers of the Government
Department, Industry officials, Local body authorities and the
local MLA were present. In that meeting, it was resolved to
strictly implement the said 13 directions of the Expert
Committee as approved by the Government. In addition, the
following 3 recommendations were also included and directed
to be complied by the industry. They are:
1. Provide delay pond for treated effluent.
2. provide bag filters to reduce suspended matter emission.
3. Enclose the crushed bone unloading area for reducing the

smell.
148
94. Pursuant to the directions, the company submitted
an Action Plan before the KSPCB and by order dated
13.10.2011, it was approved by the Board. KSPCB, District
Office, Thrissur had closely monitored the progress in
implementing the Action Plan. According to the Board, the
industry implemented all the recommendations within the
stipulated period as per the Action Plan except the cleaning of
Chalakkudy river, the recommendation no.13. It was
subsequently, the matter came before the Honble High Court
of Kerala in WP(C) No.15795 of 2013 and the Honble High
Court directed the CSIR NEERI to conduct a detailed study
with respect to the environmental pollution status. As per the
order dated 26.11.2014, the Chairman of the KSPCB directed
for a joint Monitoring by NEERI and KSPCB along with the
representatives of Thrissur District Collector, to assess the
implementation status of the recommendations of NEERI
report dated May 2014 and compliance of the directions of
KSPCB dated 24.09.2014. Accordingly, Joint Monitoring
Committee conducted inspection at the industry during the
period January 14-15 , 2015 and based on the findings of the

149
Joint Monitoring Committee, report was prepared by CSIR
NEERI dated 27th February, 2015.
95. The report reveals that performance assessment
of effluent treatment plant (ETP) was carried out through grab
sampling of inflow to ETP and treated effluent after tertiary
treatment (sand filter) including final treated effluent being
discharged into Chalukkudy river. Sample of mature compost
was also collected and analysed for various hazardous
constituents. Surface water quality assessment of Chalakkudy
river was conducted through sampling from 5 locations
starting from 2 km upstream of intake Well of the industry
(Vynthala pump house) to 3 km downstream of treated
effluent discharge point. Treated effluent and Chalakkudy river
water samples were also collected for estimation of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Ambient Air sample from
acidulation process unit area was also collected to estimate the
acidity level in ambient air. Performance assessment of the
pilot scale scrubber unit installed was conducted for VOCs
estimation through collection of air samples at the inlet and

150
outlet of the scrubber unit. On the performance assessment of
effluent treatment plant, the report shows the concentration of
major parameter in the final treated effluent being discharged
into Chalakkudy river conform to the discharge Standards
stipulated by the KSPCB . On the surface water quality
assessment of Chalakkudy river, the report shows the
concentration of all the monitored parameters in Chalakkudy
river water samples at various locations conform to the
Acceptable Limits of the Drinking Water Specifications (IS-
10500 2012 Second revision) On the assessment of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) in water and air samples, it is
reported that the river water samples collected near
Iyathykadavu irrigation pumping house was found to have a
few number of target VOC species in detectable level. The fuel
(diesel) contamination from the pumps installed in the pump
houses located along the banks of the river and motor boats
plying in the river may be contributing to the target species.
The results of the two air samples comprising inlet and outlet
of scrubber were analysed and it is reported that the
performance efficiency based on the single trial run, indicates
more than 99% efficiency in scrubbing of Benzene and

151
complete scrubbing of detected target species. Further, trial
runs are necessary to ascertain effective performance of
scrubber system. On the assessment of acidity in Ambient Air
at acidulation process unit area, it is recorded that the acidity
of the aliquot was estimated to be 4.3 mg/l as CACO3
indicating only insignificant amount /quantities of acidic
gases on the ambient air of the process unit area. The report
shows that the team assessed the status of implementation of
the recommendations and directions during inspection. In
addition, the performance evaluation of the operation of ETP
and assessment of surface water quality , according to them,
based on the performance evaluation of ETP , it is concluded
that the physico-chemical characteristics including heavy
metals concentration in the final treated effluent being
discharged into Chalakkudy river conform to the discharge
Standards stipulated by the KSPCB. Hence, there is no impact
of the discharge from the industry on river water quality. The
overall analysis of mature compost samples indicates that the
compost does not contain any hazardous constituent. The
concentration of the analysed parameters in Chalakkudy river
water samples monitored at various locations conform to the

152
Acceptable limits of the Drinking Water Specifications. The
target species of VOCs were not detectable in ETP effluent
sample being discharged into Chalakkudy river. As the target
VOCs species are below detectable limit in treated effluent
discharged into Chalakkudy river . Hence, there is no impact of
the discharge from the industry on river water quality. The
performance efficiency of the pilot scale scrubber based on the
single trial run indicated more than 99% efficiency in scrubbing
of Benzene and complete scrubbing of the other detected
target species. The estimated acidity in the ambient air at
acidulation process unit area indicate insignificant
amount/quantity of acidic gases in the ambient air around the
process unit area. On the compliance of the recommendations,
it is reported as follows:
As observed by the joint monitoring team,

M/s. Nitta Gelatin India Limited (industry) has
complied with the implementation of 13
recommendations out of 23 as suggested by
NEERI and 10 out of 13 directions issued by
KSPCB. The remaining recommendations
/directions are under various stages of
implementation and are being taken up in a time
bound manner by the industry, Management
153
making efforts to comply within the stipulated

time schedule.
96. As directed by the Chairman, KSPCB, to assess the
implementation status of the recommendations given by NEERI
and the compliance of directions of the KSPCB, a joint
monitoring Committee once again inspected the industry on
12th and 13th August, 2015 and the monitoring committee
comprised of two officials from KSPCB, 5 members from
NEERI, Tahsildar, Thrissur and the representatives of the
industry. Based on the findings, the CSIR NEERI prepared a
report of the Joint Monitoring Committee on 10th October,
2015.
97. The report shows that based on the physico chemical
analysis of various samples of ETP, performance of ETP was
found to be satisfactory and the final treated effluent being
discharged into Chalakkudy river conform to the discharge
Standards stipulated by KSPCB. The overall analysis of
mature compost sample indicates that the compost does not
contain any hazardous constituents. The concentration of

154
analysed parameters in Chalakkudy river water samples
monitored at various locations conform to the Acceptable Limits
of the Drinking Water Specifications. The target species of
VOCs were almost not detectable in ETP effluent being
discharged into Chalakkudy river. As the target VOCs species
are below detectable limit in treated effluent discharged into
Chalakkudy river, there is no impact of the discharge from the
industry on river water quality. The VOCs in the ambient air
outside the industry premises indicate insignificant
concentration in the ambient air. On the compliance of the
recommendations and directions, it was reported that the
industry has complied with the implementation of 20
recommendations out of 23 as suggested by NEERI and all the
13 directions issued by KSPCB. The remaining two
recommendations of the NEERI to be complied, are the
implementation of bio-filter for odour control and 2nd
anaerobic reactor for biogas recovery. It is reported that they
are under various stages of implementation. Regarding odour
control, pilot scale trials for wet and dry scrubbing were
conducted and the performance was observed to be ineffective.
Hence, bio-filter option was considered based on the study

155
conducted by CSIR NEERI, Trivandrum. They are entrusted
with the design of bio-filter system and it is in progress. The
second anaerobic reactor being constructed similar to the first
unit, which is performing effectively. It is reported that the
construction is completed and balance work is in progress for
commissioning. Both the works are being taken up in a time
bound manner by the industry to comply within the stipulated
time, i.e December 2015. The remaining direction to be
complied with is regarding the cleaning of weeds along the
banks of the river, for which, the industry waits for an approval
from Kadukutty Panchayat for implementing the same.
98. Another Joint Monitoring Committee consisting of the
same officials again inspected the industry on August 12 and
13, 2015 to assess the implementation status of the
recommendations of the NEERI and the balance directions of
the KSPCB. Based on the findings, the CSIR NEERI prepared a
report dated October 10, 2015.

156
99. When the applications were listed before the Tribunal
on 11.3.2016, it was reported by the industry that due to some
sabotage outlet pipeline which carries the treated effluents
from the industry to the Chalakkudy river, was damaged,
which are to be rectified, the Tribunal directed the KSPCB to
submit a status report as to when the damage occurred to the
pipeline and the extent of damage and the extent of
rectification done by the industry and the quantum of discharge
of effluent on the land and river. The Board was also directed
to file an analysis report of the effluent including all the
parameters. When the matter was listed on 22.03.2016, it
was reported by the Board that the report of analysis is
awaited. At that time, it was clarified by the Tribunal that the
samples shall be collected from the place of discharge, place of
breakage and the place where the discharge is let out into the
river at the final outlet of the ETP.
100. The KSPCB thereafter, submitted a report dated
16th April 2016. The report shows that during inspection, it was
noticed that the pipeline carrying the treated effluent was in

157
partially broken stage at a particular point. Certain length of
this pipeline is laid along and under the bed of Natural thodu
(canal), through which there is flow of water. The broken part
of the pipeline is at this point. The thodu is in the poramboke
land under the custody of Kadukutty Grama Panchayat. The
broken portion of the pipeline is already under the water and
certain quantity of effluent was discharged through the broken
part into the Thodu and the mixture of effluent and water was
seen flowing into the thodu. It is roughly estimated that 1/3rd
effluent leaked into the thodu through the broken portion of
the pipeline. It is reported that black coloured sludge like
materials could be found to be deposited beside damaged part
of the pipe line. But, during the time of inspection, no sludge
like materials could be found to be discharged into the thodu
along with the effluent. The broken hole of the pipeline is not
visible. It was learnt that the hole is having about 30 cm
diameter. As per the report, the Board got information about
the damage of the pipeline in April 2015. When a complaint
was received alleging the breaking of the pipeline, the Board
issued a notice to the industry to stop the discharge of effluent
through the broken pipeline on 18.04.2016. The industry

158
replied that they had noticed the leak on 08.03.2015 and it was
repaired on 11.03.2015. Though the industry claims that the
leakage had been completely arrested, it was found at the time
of inspection that the leakage still continues. According to the
industry, the local people have blocked the pipeline partially
by putting concrete blocks in the broken portion. The report
also shows that during January, 2016, public had agitated
against the discharge of effluent through the hole of the broken
pipeline into thodu and based on a complaint from the public,
the Board issued direction to the industry on 04.01.2016 to
take necessary action for redressal of the complaint regarding
the discharge of effluent into the thodu due to the leakage of
the pipeline. At the time of inspection, the Board collected
effluent samples from the outlet of the company inside the
factory premises and also from the damaged part of the
pipeline carrying effluent from the industry to the Chalakkudy
river. It is reported that the sample taken from the damaged
portion is a mixture of effluent and water flowing through the
thodu. As the pipeline carrying effluent of the factory is about
2.5 meters below the water level of the river, the officials
159
could not take sample of effluent from that final discharge
point.
101. The report shows that the result of the analysis of
effluent taken from the pipe breakage point is as follows:
Table- A
Parameter Value Permissible limit

(mg./l) except pH (mg./l) except pH
pH 7.1 5.5-9.0
BOD 9.0 30
COD 48.0 250
Suspended 55.0 100
Solids
Dissolved BDL 5
Phosphates
Oil & Grease 10 10
Ammonical 130.2 50
Nitrogen
Total Dissolved 4914 No standard is prescribed
Solids under the EP Rule
Chlorides 2729.7 No standard is prescribed
under the EP Rule
Analysis of the effluents taken from the outlet of the industry is
as follows:
Table- B
Parameter Value Permissible limit
(mg./l) except pH (mg./l) except pH
pH 7.5 5.5-9.0
BOD 34.4 30
COD 72 250
Suspended Solids 28 100
Dissolved BDL 5
Phosphates
Oil & Grease 9.1 10
Ammonical 10.1 50
Nitrogen
Total Dissolved 3141 No standard is prescribed
Solids under the EP Rule
Chlorides 1637.8 No standard is prescribed
under the EP Rule
160
102. The parameters of TDS and Chlorides were
omitted from the Schedule IV of General Standards for
discharging environmental Pollutants as per Rule 2(d)(i) of the
Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 vide Notification No.GSR
801 (E) dated 31.12.1993. It is therefore reported that there
are no standards for parameters of TDS and Cholorides. The
report shows that BOD found on analysis is slightly exceeded
the Standards in the effluent collected from the authorised
outlet of the industry and all other parameters are within the
prescribed standards. The analysis report of the effluent
collected from the broken portion of pipeline showed that the
parameters of Ammonical Nitrogen being 130.2 mg/l, exceeds
the prescribed Standard of 50 mg/l. It is observed that the
industry has to take necessary action to bring all the effluent
parameters in accordance with the prescribed standard as per
the Consent Order. The Board, therefore, issued direction
dated 13.4.2016 to the industry to take urgent action to ensure
that the effluent is discharged only after fully complying with
the effluent standards prescribed in the consent to Operate.

161
103. While these applications were pending, Original
Application No.412 of 2016 (PB) was filed by the NGIL Action
Council on 03.08.2016 to direct the respondent No.5, Central
Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to study the pollution caused
by the industry to the air, water and land in terms of the
parameters fixed for effluents and to restrain the industry
from discharging effluents and sludge into the Chalakkudy
river. This Tribunal, by order dated 29th September 2016
restrained the industry from discharging untreated effluents
and sludge not meeting to the standards of the Pollution
Control Board into Chalakkudy river till the next date of
hearing i.e. 06.10.2016. Further, the Central Pollution Control
Board, Delhi is directed to file a report including sludge and
AAQ in the industry.
104. Pursuant to the directions, the officials of Central
Pollution Control Board (CPCB) inspected the industry during
October 3rd 5th, 2016 and submitted a report dated
07.11.2016 in Application No.412 of 2016. (PB) As the said
report deals with the same industry causing pollution by

162
discharging effluents into Chalakkudy river as in the other
applications, a copy of the report has also been filed in these
applications.
105. As the Honble High Court of Kerala by order dated
07.04.2016 in W.P.(C) No.28913 of 2015 (L) issued
instructions to the NEERI to conduct an inspection on the
premises of the company of the respondent (M/s.NGIL) and
the 1st petitioner in the Writ Petition as well as the Secretary
to the Panchayat shall be permitted to be part of inspection to
be conducted by NEERI and the report is to be filed within six
weeks. Accordingly, NEERI conducted yet another inspection
on May 11th and 12th, 2016. The team consists of Acting
Director, Dr.Tapas Nandy, Principal Scientist, Mr.M.Karthik,
Senior Scientist Mr.P.Manekar, and Dr.R.Biswas, senior
scientist and A.Kuila, Project Assistant for NEERI, for the
pollution Board, the very same earlier officials, i.e.
Environmental Engineer, P.K.Baburajan, Assistant Environment
Engineer, P.B.Sreelakshmy for the company, Executive Director
Corporate Mr.S.Mohan and Unit head, Mr.A.N.Kannan and for

163
the Panchayat, its Secretary, Junior Superintendent, and their
counsel and for the writ petitioner, apart from their counsel
writ petitioners 1 and 2 were present.
106. The inspection was mainly to assess the
implementation of series of recommendations of the NEERI.
As is clear from the report, NEERI team inspected the site
pointed out by the counsel appearing for the writ petitioners,
i.e the land adjacent to the industry site, which was earlier
objected alleging that the industry had disposed sludge and
effluent into its land and collected samples from the said land
also. As it was represented that at the appropriate point of the
pipeline effluent was discharged into the natural drain, the
NEERI team inspected the place and also collected samples
from there also. When the Writ Petitioners counsel insisted
that the same procedure that was followed by taking samples
for testing under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act,
should be followed, NEERI agreed to take independent sample
and also directed the Pollution Control Board to collect their
samples and also permitted the Writ Petitioners to collect the

164
samples. The performance assessment of ETP was carried out
by NEERI team through flow monitoring at inlet to flash mixer,
grab samples of process effluents in flow to ETP and treated
effluent after tertiary treatment (sand filter) including final
treated effluent being discharged. ETP sludge sample was
collected from various places. On site analysis for physico-
chemical parameters was also conducted. In addition, water
and soil/sediment samples were also collected from two
locations identified by the petitioners, as stated earlier,
namely, the paddy field adjacent to the company site and the
drain where the effluent carrying pipeline had earlier broken
and caused leakage. The water quality assessment at
Chalakkudy river was conducted at 5 locations, i.e. 2.00 km
upstream of intake well of the industry, at the point of
discharge of treated effluent of the industry and 500 m,
2.00km and 3.00 km downstream of treated effluent
discharge point of the industry. Samples of treated effluent and
Chalakkudy river were also collected for assessment of VOCs.
The report shows that on the second day when the samples
were collected, attempts were made by some unidentified
persons to block the collection of samples. Still, the NEERI

165
team could successfully collect the samples and send them for
analysis. On the implementation status of NEERI
recommendations, the following are reported.:
Implementation status of NEERIs recommendation at M/s NGIL
Sr. No NEERIs Recommendations Implementation Status

Odour Control
1. Provide an enclosure for the -The CB charging area has been
charging process of CB. The enclosed by constructing a L
existing CB charging equipment shaped partition wall of 37x5m
may be relocated within the (ht) and 11x7m (ht).
enclosure with necessary -Equipment have been relocated
modifications, and provided with and the enclosure has been
blower and discharge duct provided with a blower and a
connected to a new scrubber discharge duct connected to a
system of 12000 m3/h capacity, or new bio-filter.
treated in a biofilter designed for -The bio-filter has been designed
an adequate capacity. Enhance by CSIR-NIIST. Design
the blower capacity by providing completed by 30-08-2015 and
an additional blower of 30000 the bio-filter was commissioned
m3/h capacity to achieve improved on December 30, 2015. As
air circulation. observed the bio-filter was in
operation during the inspection
period.
2. The bay on the Eastern side of the A partition wall of 37x5m (ht) has
CB godown must be isolated / been constructed and work was
separated by providing a partition completed on 18.10.2014 thereby
wall to reduce the storage space isolating the bay on the eastern
of the godown, and restrict storing side of CB godown and reducing
of CB on the Eastern side of the the CB storage by 357.2 m2.
godown.
3. Ambient air from acidulation of CB -Ducting from acid bath and DCP
and DCP precipitation & filtration areas to the existing bio-filter has
process areas, may be routed to been provided and blower
the existing biofilter by providing installed on 20.06.2015. Thus the
ducts and blowers ambient air is being routed to the
existing bio-filter for control of
odour in these process areas.
-Odour has reduced significantly
in the process areas as
compared to first monitoring
conducted in early 2014.
4. The present practice of spraying SOP has been prepared and
deodorant in the process unit being practiced accordingly in
areas where odour emissions are process unit areas.
higher must be continued to However, with control measures
control the odour problem in and in place, the frequently of
around the industry premises. spraying the deodorant in the
process unit areas has reduced
166
to a great extent.
Air emissions control
5. Use of low ash and low sulphur -Low sulphur furnace oil is being
contents fuel in furnaces and purchased from Bharat
boilers must be practiced for Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and
control of PM and SO in use from April 2015 for control
concentration at sources. of air emissions.
-Energy (biogas) recovered from
the 2nd anaerobic reactor
installed is routed to boiler
thereby reducing furnace oil
consumption by ~60%
6. The ossein furnaces hot air -To control particulate matter
generator emissions marginally emission from ossein hot air
exceeded the regulatory limits for generation furnace, mechanical
participate matter. Though the dust collector has been installed
monitoring data is based on short on 16.01.2015. This unit was in
term assessment, feasible operation as observed during the
corrective measures are needed inspection.
to ensure emission within the
norms on a sustainable basis.
Optimization of ETP performance
7. The chemical treatment unit Installation of online pH meters (6
process of ETP comprising Nos.) was completed on
coagulation-flocculation must be 05.11.2014 in the following units:
provided with an online pH meter -Buffer tank
in reaction tanks for ensuring -Flocculator1
maintenance of optimum pH for -Flocculator2
effective precipitation of the -Inlet to aeration tank
pollutants. -Secondary clarifier outlet
-Lamella overflow weir.
As observed one of the online pH
display was under maintenance
during the inspection on 11th May
2016 however the same was
rectified on 12th May 2016.
8. Regular maintenance of the -The worn out belts of surface
surface aerators must be ensured aerators have been replaced with
and in case of the compressor the new belts, and work was
air discharge rate must be completed by 10.08.2014.
maintained as per the -The maintenance schedule has
recommendation of the been revised as per the
manufacturer. manufactures manual, and is
being practiced.
9. The present practice of adding As observed, the practice of
coagulant / coagulant aid in coagulant / coagulant aid dosing
biological process for sludge at outlet of aeration tank was
settleability must be discontinued stopped to improve the growth of
to improve biomass growth in biomass in aeration tank. This
aeration tanks. has improved the treated effluent
quality of the ETP.
10. Regular backwashing of sand -SOP has been prepared for
filters must be practiced, and if backwashing of sand filter and is
necessary the media must be being practiced since
167
replaced with proper media size 02.08.2014.

depending on the size of the -Presently the suspended solids
suspended fraction. concentration in treated effluent
from sand filter is within the
stipulated standards. The
management must ensure that, if
necessary the media must be
replaced with proper media size
depending on the size of the
suspended fraction.
Reduction in sludge generation
11. Scientifically based treatability of -SOP for optimization of chemical
process effluents must be adopted dosage has been prepared and
for chemical treatment for the same is being practiced as
optimization of chemicals dosage observed.
to reduce chemical consumption -Chemical dosing tanks with
and subsequent chemical sludge dosing pumps have been
generation in ETP. installed and commissioned on
02.03.2015 for effective
coagulant dosing and were
observed to be in operation
during inspection.
Water quality of river water
12. M/s NGIL must judiciously monitor -Monitoring of chloride and TDS
fortnightly the chloride and TDS parameters in Chalakudy river
parameters in the river water water being monitored every
especially during lean flow fortnight.
periods. If any time the -The results of the latest sample
concentration of the referred collected in May 2016 and
parameters in the river water analysed indicate that the
exceeds the acceptable limits of concentration of chloride and
the Indian Standard Drinking TDS parameters does not
Water Specifications (IS10500: exceed the acceptable limits of
2012), M/s NGIL must the Indian Standard Drinking
immediately ensure necessary Water Specifications (IS 10500:
measure to bring down the 2012).
concentration of the referred
parameters in the treated effluent
being discharged by increasing
the flow ratio of polishing pond
effluent to delay pond effluent.
13. M/s NGIL must submit the The latest analysis report of the
analyses report on river water river water quality was submitted
quality to the KSPCB every by M/s NGIL to KSPCB on
fortnight. 04.05.2016, and same was
confirmed by Shri. P.K.
Baburajan, Environmental
Engineer.
14. M/s NGIL must undertake regular -As per management of M/s
cleaning of weeds along the NGIL request letter has been
banks of the river specially near submitted to Irrigation
the treated effluent discharge Department on 30.08.2014 for
pipeline to ensure free flow of granting permission to undertake
water at the banks, and thereby cleaning of weeds along the
168
mitigating the possibility of banks of the river.

anaerobicity at the banks of the -Irrigation Department has
river. directed M/s NGIL to initiate
action through Kadukutty
Panchayath.
-Letter from M/s NGIL was
submitted to Gram Panchayath
on 06.08.15 requesting to grant
permission for cleaning of weeds.
- However, formal grant of
permission is to be issued by
Kadukutty Gram Panchayath to
M/s NGIL.
15. The flexible pipe is use for All existing flexible pipes in the
conveyance of treated / Untreated ETP area have been replaced
wastewater from one unit of the with rigid pipes.
ETP to another, must be replaced
by rigid pipes.
In plant control
measure
16. M/s NGIL must consider the In plant control measure through
feasibility of further reducing the reuse of seal water in paddle
effluent generation through in washer implemented as
plant process improvements there observed during the inspection
by decreasing the quantity of thereby reducing the effluent
effluent discharge into the river. generation and reusing ~50 m3
water per day within the plant.
Green belt
development
17. An additional area of 0.37 ha is Development of additional green
further recommended for belt has been initiated through
development as green belt at plantation of tree species
various locations. recommended by NEERI under
the guidance of State Social
Forestry.
18. New green belt of 10 meter width M/s NGIL had requested for an
is recommended on the North amendment in the development
East of industry premises (low of green belt in the low lying area
lying area) and near Smruti (3000 m2), because of the terrain
Vanam. of the industrial site. The slope of
the industrial site is towards the
low lying area and is used for
collecting the storm water runoff
during monsoon through natural
gradient. Development of green
belt will obstruct the natural flow
of storm water runoff. As
observed during inspection,
green belt was developed in
equivalent area within the
industrial site.
19. The industry should also improve Plantation of high foliage trees
the green belt cover through has been initiated around the
plantation of high foliage trees periphery of CB godown and
169
around the periphery of CB other point sources of odour

godown and other point sources emission. The plants have
of odour emission to act as barrier attained a height of about 10m on
for controlling the secondary the inspection day.
fugitive emissions in the areas
within the industry.
20. Aegel marmelos, Terminalia The tree species as
catappa, Tectona grandis, recommended have been planted
Azadirachta indica, Artocarpus near Smrithivan as per
heterophyllus and Mangifera availability. As observed during
indica are the species growing inspection the plants are growing
well in the local environment and well, and have gained a height of
also possesses the large biomass ~7m.
with broader leaf area. Therefore,
these species are recommended
for developing new green belt
areas.
Implementation
of TEC
Recommnedati
on
21. M/s NGIL must ensure judicious M/s NGIL is adhering to the
implementation of the recommendations.
recommendation made by the
Technical Expert Committee
which is still not complied within
the targeted time frame.
Human
resource
development
22. An Environmental Management Chemical engineer (Mr. A. R.
Cell must be created with either a Nithin) has been designated In-
chemical engineer or an charge of Environmental
environmental engineer as in- Management Cell from
charge of the cell who will directly 30.06.2014 and is reporting to
report to the Unit Head. This will the Unit head.
facilitate independent
responsibility of the cell for
efficient and sustainable pollution
control leading to better
environmental management of the
industrial activities.
Corporate
responsibility
23. M/s NGIL must also be committed -As observed an additional
to go beyond compliance through anaerobic reactor for recovery of
continuous improvement in biogas has been implemented.
management practices, and Commissioning was done on
delineating a road map for 15.10.2015 and the system after
progressive renovation in stabilization is in operation since
environment management 12.11.2015.
system. -This has facilitated usage of
biogas in the boiler thereby
further reducing fuel oil
170
consumption to the tune of 1450

litres per day. This has also
reduced the load on the aerobic
unit process resulting in saving of
operational cost through energy
conservation.
-Presently the reactor is
operational at the flow rate of
~950 m3/d with inlet BOD
concentration of 9500 mg/l and
biogas generation in the range
2780-3200 m3/d.
107. On the implementation of the recommendations of
KSPCB, the report is as follows:
Table 2 : Implementation status of KSPCB directions at M/s. NGIL
Sr.
KSPCB directions Compliance Status
No
1. Cameras are to be provided in - CCTV surveillance camera installed.
the effluent treatment plant area The system is in operation from March
for viewing the effluent30,2015.
treatment plant operators from - Five cameras have been installed
District office at Thrissur, two each at chemical treatment units
Regional office at Ernakulum & and aeration tanks, and one at sludge
from Head office of PCB filtration unit.
- Internet connection established.
2. The odour of treated effluent is -M/s NGIL has analysed effluent
to be assessed. samples for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) through an NABL
accredited laboratory and analysis
report submitted to KSPCB vide letter
(NO. PCB/OD/87) dated 30.10.2014.
- However NEERI also collected
effluent and river water samples for
assessment of VOCs during the joint
monitoring.
- The details are reported under
section 5.0 of this report.
3. Oil and Grease trap is to be -Oil & Grease trap installed on
provided as oil and grease in 25.04.2015 and is in operation.
effluent treatment plant is high
4. Anaerobic digester is to be -A second anaerobic reactor for
installed before aeration tank so recovery of biogas is under
as to reduce the generation of implementation. This will facilitate use
sludge, to reduce the dosing rate of biogas reducing the fuel oil
171
of chemicals and to produce consumption and also reduce the load

energy. on aerobic process resulting in energy
conservation.
- The unit is schedules to be
commissioned by December 2015.
5. Treated effluent is to be reduced Seal water recovery and reuse
to the maximum extent. implemented resulting in reusing 50
m3 of water per day.
6. The storage area of godown is to A partition wall of 37x5m (ht) has
be partitioned for controlling been constructed and work completed
smell problem. on 18.10.2014 thereby isolating the
bay on the eastern side of CB godown
and reducing the CB storage by 357.2
m2.
7. Acidity in fumes is to be Estimation of acidity in ambient air at
ascertained as there is chance of acidulation process unit area was
microbes in biofilter being carried out by NEERI on 15.01.15. The
affected. acidity in ambient air sample was
estimated at 4.3 mg/L as CaCO
(Section 6.0) of the NEERI report
dated February 27, 2015.
8. Arrangement shall be made to -The worn out belts of surface
provide minimum required aerators have been replaced with new
dissolved oxygen content in the belts.
aeration tank & the proper -The maintenance schedule has been
functioning of aeration tank revised as per the manufactures
manual and being practiced.
9. TCPL analysis to be done for soil M/s NGIL has conducted TCPL analysis
and sediments. for soil and sediment samples through
a NABL accredited laboratory and
report submitted to KSPCB.
10. Facility shall be provided to On line pH meters (6 Nos.) have been
maintain/ adjust pH in effluent installed by 05.11.2014 in the
treatment plant units. following units:
-Buffer tank
-Flocculator 1
-Flocculator 2
-Inlet to aeration tank
-Secondary clarifier outlet
-Lamella overflow weir.
11. Periodic maintenance of sand -SOP prepared for backwashing of
filters is to be ensured sand filter and being practiced since
02.08.2014.
As per management of M/s NGIL
assessment study for media
replacement to ensure proper media
size will be taken up as and when
required since presently the
suspended solids concentration in
treated effluent from sand filter is the
172
within the stipulated standards.

12. Environment management cell Chemical engineer (Mr. A. R. Nithin)
shall be strengthened by posting has been designated In-charge of
an engineer exclusively for the Environmental Management Cell from
purpose. 30.06.2014 and is reporting to Unit
Head.
13. There shall not be any flexible All existing flexible pipes in the ETP
pipes in the factory. The area have been replaced by rigid
environmental engineer, District pipes.
office, Thrissur shall ensure this.
108. On the Performance Assessment of ETP the
following is reported:
5.0 Performance Assessment of Effluent Treatment

Plant
The assessment of existing effluent treatment plant

(ETP) was carried out through flow monitoring at inlet to
flash mixer and through collection of grab samples at
inlet (process effluent from ossein and dicalcium
phosphates plants) to flash mixer, treated effluent from
sand filter and final treated effluent being discharged.
The samples were analysed for major parameters as per
Standard Method (APHA, 2005. Standards Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wasterwater, 21st Ed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC,
USA). The physic-chemical characteristics in terms of
major relevant parameters along with the heavy metals
of the various samples collected including the discharge
Standards stipulated by the KSPCB are presented in
Table 5. The concentrations of the major parameters in
the final treated effluent from ETP conform to the
discharge standards stipulated by the KSPCB for M/s
NGIL.
The analysis data for the constituents estimated in ETP

sludge is presented in Table 6. Based on the process
details of generation and the overall analysis it may be
concluded that the ETP sludge does not contain any
hazardous constituted and is therefore classified as
173
non-hazardous waste as per the Hazardous Waste

(Handling, Management and Tran boundary Movement)
Rules, 2005. The sludge, however, has high pH value
and needs to be managed in an environmentally sound
manner to prevent contamination of land and water
resources.
109. On the water quality Assessment of Chalakkudy river,
the report reads:
6.0 Chalakudy River Water Quality Assessment
To assess the water quality of Chalakudy river, grab

samples were collected at five locations from 2.0 km
upstream of intake well of M/s NGIL (Vynthala pump
house), at treated effluent discharge location of M/s
NGIL, 500 m downstream of treated effluent discharge
location of M/s NGIL (Iyathukadavu irrigation pump
house), 2.0 km downstream of treated effluent discharge
location of M/s NGIL (Pulik Kadavu bridge) and 3.0 km
downstream of treated effluent discharge location of M/s
NGIL (Mambra irrigation pump house). Plate IV presence
the photographs of sampling being conducted in river
Chalakudy. The physic-chemical characteristics of the
river water samples collected are presented in Table 7.
The concentration of all the monitored parameters in
Chalakudy river water samples at various locations
conform to the Acceptable Limits of the Drinking Water
Specification (IS 10500:2012 Second revision).
Table 5: Physicochemical characteristics of effluents from ETP#

(Monitoring: May 12, 2016)
KSPCB
Process effluent from Final Stipulate
Sr
Method Sand treated d
.
Parameters Detection Filter effluent discharge
N Ossein
limit effluent being Standard
o DCP plant
plant discharged s for M/s
NGIL
1 pH 0.02 7.4 6.9 7.1 7.1 5.5-9.0
174
2 Temperature, C 0.1 32.0 31.4 31.4 31.2 -

3 SS 5 1368 576 36 <5 100
4 TDS 5 3530 15120 4500 1380 -
5 COD 2 2429 1214 81 35 250
6 BOD (3d;27C) 2 1750 680 42 15 30
7 Dissolved Oxygen 0.1 NM NM 4.2 5.2 -
8 Sulfate as S 0.05 215 108 95 32 -
9 Chlorides as Cl 5 1242 8875 2379 547 -
10 Ammonia as N 0.5 188 54 29 19 50
Free Ammonia as
11 0.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 BDL -
NH
12 TKN as N 0.5 86 75 56 32 -
Dissolved phosphate
13 0.01 20 24 3.6 2.5 5
as P
14 Cyanide as CN 0.01 0.1 BDL BDL BDL -
15 Oil & Grease 2 140 96 15 <2 -
Total Residual
16 0.1 BDL BDL BDL BDL -
Chloride
17 Fluoride 0.01 0.02 BDL 0.01 BDL -
18 Sulfide as S 0.5 2.0 BDL 0.6 BDL -
19 Phenolic Compounds 0.05 1.4 1.0 0.12 0.01 -
20 Nitrate as N 0.05 BDL BDL 5 1 -
Heavy metals
21 Arsenic 0.007 BDL BDL BDL BDL -
22 Aluminum 0.009 BDL BDL BDL BDL -
23 Copper 0.0004 0.04 0.03 0.01 BDL -
24 Cadmium 0.0006 BDL BDL BDL BDL -
25 Total Chromium 0.01 BDL 0.20 BDL BDL -
26 Iron 0.001 0.45 0.22 0.18 0.10 -
27 Lead 0.009 0.02 0.01 BDL BDL -
28 Manganese 0.002 0.39 0.26 0.10 0.05 -
29 Mercury 0.09 BDL BDL BDL BDL -
30 Nickel 0.005 BDL 0.05 BDL BDL -
31 Zinc 0.001 BDL 0.20 BDL BDL -
Grab Sample:
All parameters are expressed in mg/l except pH and temperature.
DCP-DI-Calcium phosphate; BDL Below detectable limit; NM- Not Monitored.
Total inflow to flash mixer 2563 m3/d
Table 6 : Constituents in ETP Sludge#
Sr. No Parameters ETP Sludge
Proximate analysis of samples

1 pH 9.9
2 Moisture content (%) 15
3 Volatile matter (% dry weight) 45.3
4 Fixed Carbon (% dry weight) 27.8
5 Ash Content (% dry weight) 56.7
6 Calorific value Kcal/kg 795
CHNS analysis (% magnitude)
7 Carbon (C) 20.5
175
8 Hydrogen (H) 1.6

9 Nitrogen (N) 2.3
10 Sulfur (S) 25.6
Water
Heavy metal (mg/kg) Sludge TCLP Extract
Extract
11 Arsenic 0.06 BDL BDL
12 Copper 1.2 0.01 0.06
13 Cadmium 0.1 BDL BDL
14 Total Chromium 1.6 BDL 0.1
15 Iron 1652.7 15.6 5.6
16 Lead 0.5 0.01 0.05
17 Manganese 122.5 1.6 0.8
18 Mercury BDL BDL BDL
19 Nickel 25.1 BDL 0.2
20 Zinc 52.6 0.6 0.1
Water
Anion, Alkaline & Earth Metal Concentration (mg/Kg) TCLP Extract
Extract
21 Chloride 36 166
22 Sulfate as SO 1003.6 1523
23 Nitrate as N 0.2 0.36
24 Phosphate as P 966 109
25 Fluoride as F 100 76
26 Sodium as Na 65 18
27 Potassium as K 5 39
28 Calcium as Ca 12 45
29 Magnesium as Mg 13 19
Grab Sample: BDL-Below Detection Limit
Method detection limit (mg/kg): Arsenic 0.007; Calcium 0.0006; Total Chromium 0.01;
Mercury 0.09; Nickel 0.005.
Table 7: Physico-chemical characteristics of water samples from

river Chalakkudy * (Monitoring: May 12,2016.)
3.0 km
500 m d/s of
2.0 km
d/s of treated Drinking water
2.0 d/s of
treated effluent Standards$
k/m At treated
effluent dischar
u/s of treated effluent
dischar ge
intake effluent dischar
Sr Method ge locatio
well of dischar ge
. Paramet detecti location n of
M/s ge locatio
N ers on of M/s M/s
NGIL locatio n of
o Limit NGIL NGIL
(Vynth n of M/s Permissi
(Iyathu (Mambr Accepta
ala M/s NGIL ble
ka davu a ble Limit
pump NGIL (Pullk limit @
irrigatio irrigati
house) kadavu
n pump on
bridge)
house) pump
house)
1 pH 0.02 7.8 7.7 7.5 7.3 7.5 6.5-8.5 NR
2 Alkalinity 0.2 9.0 10.2 10.5 9.7 11.0 200 600
3 SS 5 6 6 8 6 4 - -
4 TDS 5 44 45 57 110 105 500 2000
5 COD 2 22 14 16 16 20 - -
6 BOD
2 <5 <5 <5 <5 7 - -
(3d;27C)
7 DO 0.1 7.0 6.9 7.0 6.5 6.4 - -
8 Sulfate as
0.05 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.8 200 400
SO
9 Chloride
5 12 15 23 54 58 250 1000
as CL
10 Phosphate
0.01 0.8 0.6 0.6 1.2 1.3 - -
P
11 Ammonia 0.5 21 14.7 12 15 12 - -
176
N
12 Nitrate as
0.05 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.6 0.9 45 NR
N
13 TKN as N 0.5 35 42 46 49 48 - -
14 Calcium 0.2 2.6 2.7 3.6 6.3 8.4 75 200
15 Magnesiu
0.2 2.2 1.9 2.4 5.6 6.1 30 100
m
16 Total
hardness* 0.2 15 13 17 25 26 200 600
*
17 Sodium 0.1 9 11 19 43 63 - -
18 Potassium 0.1 0.3 0.5 2.1 4.3 5.6 - -
19 Aluminiu
0.009 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.03 0.2
m
20 Copper 0.0004 0.02 0.02 0.01 BDL 0.01 0.050 1.5
21 Cadmium 0.0006 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.003 NR
22 Chromium 0.01 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.05 NR
23 Iron 0.001 0.32 0.66 0.45 0.41 0.55 0.3 0.1
24 Lead 0.009 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.01 NR
25 Manganes
0.002 0.16 0.09 0.06 0.09 0.05 0.1 0.3
e
26 Mercury 0.09 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.001 NR
27 Nickel 0.005 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.02 NR
28 Zinc 0.001 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 5 15
Grab Sample: All parameters are expressed in mg/l except Ph; Expressed as CaCO .
BDL Below detectable limit; NR- No Relation. $ - Indian Standard Drinking Water-Specification;
[IS 10500;2012] (Second Revision); @ - Permissible limit in the absence of alternate source.
110. On the characteristics of water and soil samples
from various sites as identified by the Writ Petitioners, it is
reported as follows:
7.0 Characteristics of Water and Soli/ Sediment

Samples from varios Sites as Identified by Petitioners
To assess the impact of any industrial discharge onto land

from the company in the vicinity of the industry, water
samples were collected from the location as identified by the
Petitioners. Water samples were collected from the paddy
field adjacent to the industrial site of M/s NGIL, and drain
where effluent discharge pipeline was damaged. The
physico-chemical characteristics of water samples are
presented in Table 8. Soil/ sediment samples were also
collected from the above referred locations as identified by
the Petitioners. Control soil sample was collected from the
garden area within the industry premises to compare the
characteristics in terms of hazardous constituents. The
constituents analysed in the samples are presented in Table
9. Plate V presents the photographs of the sites identified by
the Petitioners.
177
Table 8: Physicochemical Characteristics of water samples# from various

sites as identified by Petitioners
(Sampling: May 12, 2016)
Water Samples From

Natural drain near the
Method paddy field where the
Sr. Paddy field adjacent
Parameters detection pipe carrying treated
No to compound wall of
limit effluent of NGIL to
M/s NGIL
Chalakudy River is
damaged
1 pH 0.02 6.2 6.5
2 Alkalinity** 0.2 1.6 2.2
3 SS 5 150 76
4 TDS 5 564 455
5 COD 2 36 15
6 BOD 2 18 9
7 Dissolved Oxygen 0.1 0.5 0.3
8 Sulfate as S 0.05 175 160
9 Chlorides as Cl 5 120 86
10 Ammonia as N 0.5 2 1.3
11 TKN as N 0.5 12 15
12 Phosphate as P 0.01 0.5 0.1
13 Cyanide as CN 0.01 BDL BDL
14 Oil & Grease 2 BDL BDL
Heavy Metals
15 Aluminum 0.009 0.52 0.12
16 Copper 0.0004 0.007 0.004
17 Cadmium 0.0006 0.002 0.001
18 Total Chromium 0.01 BDL BDL
19 Iron 0.001 5.88 2.45
20 Lead 0.009 0.01
21 Manganese 0.002 0.75 0.56
22 Mercury 0.09 BDL BDL
23 Nickel 0.005 BDL BDL
24 Zinc 0.001 0.045 0.017
Grab Sample: All parameters are expressed in mg/l except Ph; Expressed as CaCO .
BDL Below detectable limit;
Table 9: Physicochemical Characteristics of soil and sediments samples#

from various sites as identified by Petitioners
(Sampling: May 12, 2016
Sr. Parameters M/s NGIL Paddy filed Natural drain

No Campus garden adjacent to near the paddy
(Control) compound wall of field where the
M/s NGIL pipe carrying
treated effluent
of NGIL to
Chalakudy River
is damaged
Proximate analysis of samples
1 pH 9.2 6.2 5.5
2 Moisture content (%) 22.5 1.6 2.2
3 Volatile matter (%dry weight) 25.3 150 76
4 Fixed Carbon (%dry weight) 7.8 564 455
5 Ash Content (%dry weight) 89.7 36 15
178
CHNS analysis (% magnitude)

6 Carbon (C) 20.2 30.6 26.8
7 Hydrogen (H) 1.2 0.6 0.8
8 Nitrogen (N) 2.5 2.7 3.7
10 Sulfur (S) 15.6 12.6 16.7
Heavy metal (mg/Kg)
15 Arsenic 0.06 0.06 0.05
16 Copper 0.009 0.007 0.004
17 Cadmium 1.9 2.5 1.6
18 Total Cadmium 12.6 12.8 11.2
19 Iron 52.7 56.6 47.8
20 Lead 20.5 16.6 18.7
21 Manganese 2.54 1.25 1.56
22 Mercury BDL BDL BDL
23 Nickel 0.1 0.2 0.1
24 Zinc 0.89 0.75 0.57
Grab Sample: BDL-Below Detection Limits. Method detection Limit for Mercury: 0.09 mg/kg
111. Based on these findings, the following conclusions
and monitoring are reported:-
The industry was operational during the inspection period and the
production (tonnes/day) of various products on the days of
inspection & monitoring were as follows:
Date Ossein & Dicalcium Meat meal
Limed Ossein phosphate
11/05/2016 18.12 34.00 0.40
12/05/2016 17.98 36.50 0.60
As per Consent 21.6 40.5 3.0
As observed during the inspection at the industry premises, M/s

NGIL has complied with the implementation of all the
recommendations of NEERI. As regarding one recommendation i.e.
cleaning of weeds along the banks of Chalakudy river, M/s NGIL
awaits the approval from kadukutty Gram Panchayath for
implementing the same.
The concentration of VOCs detected in the ambient air as monitored
at various locations within the industry premises were insignificant.
The probable sources of the VOCs detected in the ambient air could
be vehicle emissions and combustion of biomass as the constituents
generating the detected compounds are not used in the process by
the company.
Benzene concentration as monitored within the industrial premises
was conforming to the National Standards of 5g/m3 (annual time
weighted average concentration). No regulatory standards exist in
the country for other VOC compounds.
179
The new bio-filter installed and commissioned for odour control in

process unit areas is working efficiently, and as monitored the
odorous sulphur compounds were not detectable at the new bio-
filter site.
The concentration of sulphurous odourous compounds in ambient
air in the process unit areas as monitored during the present
inspection were observed to be comparatively much lower than as
monitored in May 2014 prior to the implementation of the blower &
ducting system and bio-filter as per NEERIs recommendations for
odour control.
As monitored the sulphurous odourous compounds concentration in
ambient air within the industrial premises were below detectable
limit. No regulatory standards exist in the country for the monitored
odourous sulphur compounds.
Based on the physic-chemical analysis of various effluent samples of
ETP, the final treated effluent being discharged into Chalakudy river
conform to the discharge Standards stipulated by the KSPCB for
m/s NGIL; and also the CPCB General Standards for Discharge
(Annexure VII).
The 2nd anaerobic digester implemented is presently treating ~950
m3/d. This has facilitated additional usage of biogas in the boiler
thereby reducing the fuel oil consumption to the tune of 1450 litres
per day.
The concentration of the major parameters analysed in Chalakudy
river water samples monitored at five locations from 2.0 km
upstream of intake well of M/s NGIL (Vynthala pump house) to 3.0
km downstream of treated effluent discharge location of M/s NGIL
(Mambra irrigation pump house) are within to the Acceptable Limits
of the Drinking Water Specifications (IS10500:2012 Second
revision).
The chemical analysis of ETP sludge sample shows absence of any
hazardous constituent in the sludge.
The characteristic of the water samples collected from various
locations as identified by the Petitioners do not indicate presence of
any major pollutants in concentrations that can be attributed to any
discharge / disposal of polluted waste from the industrial activity of
M/s NGIL.
The characteristics of the soil samples from the paddy field adjacent
to the industry and also the sediment sample from the drain as
identified by the Petitioners do not indicate any major change in
characteristics as compared to control sample.
Finally, NEERI humbly submits before the Honble Court that NEERI
conducted the inspection including monitoring of air, water and sludge
samples to assess the impact of various emissions from the company
despite the adversities that resulted due to provocation, abuses and
threats by the Petitioners and their Advocates as briefed in Annexure VI.
180
Plate VI presents the photographs of some of these incidents that

occurred during the inspection.
112. Thus the NEERI report with regard to the
implementation of the recommendations of NEERI and the
directions of the KSPCB, establish that the industry has already
implemented all the recommendations except the cleaning of
weeds along the banks of the Challakudy river. It is thus clear
that the industry has performed their part even with regard to
the implementation of the recommendation, which remains to
be fully implemented, by submitting a letter dated 06.08.2015
to the Kadukutty Grama Panchayat for permission to undertake
cleaning of weeds along the banks of the river. The new bio-
filter installed and commissioned was found working efficiently.
The final treated effluent being discharged into Chalakkudy
river was found conforming to the discharge Standards
stipulated by the KSPCB and also the general Standards for
discharge fixed by CPCB. The second anaerobic digester is
found to be treating 930 m3 per day which has facilitated
additional usage of biogas in the boiler, thereby reducing the
fuel oil consumption to the tune of 1450 litres per day. The
analysis of ETP sludge sample establish that does not have any
181
hazardous constituent. However, the petitioners and others
are still not satisfied with the measurements taken by the
industry.
113. The applicants in the Original Applications had
sought for an inspection by CPCB. While so, Original Application
412 of 2016 (PB) was filed which was heard separately. In
that application, the Tribunal by order dated 29th September
2016, directed the CPCB to file an interim report as well as a
detailed report including the management of sludge and AAQ in
the industry forthwith. Pursuant to the said direction, the CPCB
inspected the premises and studied the various processes of
the industry and collected samples at different points of ETP,
outlet after delay pond and at final disposal point in the
industry premises. Based on the analysis of samples, the CPCB
has drawn the following conclusions:
The treated effluent from delay pond is

diluted with the back wash water of sand filers
(fresh water sand filter) before discharging into
the river. This resulted in dilution of TDS, COD
and Chlorides concentrations from 1014 mg/l to
2944 mg/l,331 mg/l to 47 mg/l and 2323 mg/l
182
to 1663 mg/l respectively at the final disposal

point.
The DO & MLSS concentrations are 1.5 mg/l
& 786 mg/l respectively is very less in aeration
tank.
The Ammonical nitrogen concentration at the
final outlet is exceeding 1.1 times than the
prescribed standard.
This indicates the unscientific operation and
improper maintenance of ETP which needs to be
rectified immediately.
114. To assess the status of river water quality, the
water samples and sediments were collected at three points,
i.e. upstream of discharge point, confluence/discharge point
and downstream of discharge point. The sediment samples
were collected using bottom sampler and depth sampler to
water collection at the depth of 5 m from surface water. The
result of analysis of river water and sediment are as follows:
Table 2: Analysis results of river water samples

S.No Parameter Sampling points of River Chalakudy Drinking
Water
Upstream of Confluence Downstream
discharge Point of discharge Standards
point point
1 pH at 25C 7.4 6.6 6.4 6.5-8.5
2 EC s/cm at 25C 39 70 57 -
3 TDS mg/L 30 82 38 500
4 BOD mg/L BDL BDL BDL -
5 COD mg/L 4.5 3.3 6.2 -
6 Total Hardness mg/L 8 20 18 200
7 Calcium mg/L as Ca 1.6 4.8 4.8 75-200
8 Magnesium mg/L as 0.9 1.9 1.4 30-100
Mg
183
9 Chloride mg/L 2.4 10.8 8.3 250

10 Alkalinity mg/L 10 13 12.6 200-600
11 Sulphate mg/L 1.62 1.41 1.71 200-400
12 DO mg/L 7.9 7.7 7.4 6 and
above
13 Sodium mg/L 2.9 3.2 3.0 -
14 Potassium mg/L 0.7 0.7 0.7 -
15 Mercury mg/L BDL BDL BDL 0.01
16 Arsenic mg/L BDL 0.05 BDL 0.01
17 Copper mg/L BDL BDL BDL -
18 Cadmium mg/L BDL BDL BDL 0.03
19 Total Chromium BDL BDL BDL 0.05
mg/L
20 Iron, mg/L 0.55 0.44 0.37 0.3
21 Manganese, mg/L 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.1
22 Nickel, mg/L BDL BDL BDL 0.02
23 Lead, mg/L BDL BDL BDL 0.01
24 Zinc, mg/L BDL BDL BDL 5
25 Cobalt, mg/L BDL BDL BDL -
Table 6 : Analysis results of river sediment
S.No Parameter Sediment Sediment Sediment
from from from
upstream of confluence downstream
discharge point of
point discharge
point
1 Arsenic mg/L BDL BDL BDL
2 Copper mg/L 0.12 0.08 BDL
3 Cadmium mg/L BDL BDL BDL
4 Total Chromium 0.42 0.46 0.08
mg/L
5 Iron, mg/L 281 286 4.65
6 Manganese, mg/L 2.53 1.99 0.50
7 Nickel, mg/L 0.21 0.13 0.04
8 Lead, mg/L BDL BDL BDL
9 Zinc, mg/L 0.42 0.23 0.33
10 Cobalt, mg/L 0.11 0.05 BDL
11 Mercury, mg/L The analysis is under progress.
115. From the finding of the result of the analysis, it is
inferred that the river water quality at all points is meeting
Indian Standard Drinking Water Standards except for iron that

184
indicates the water is not suitable for drinking purpose without
any treatment. The results were compared with drinking
water standards, since it is a major source of drinking water
for all domestic purposes to the large population in the
Kathikudam Panchayat. Industry has raised serious objection
to this. As rightly pointed out by the learned senior counsel
appearing for the industry, the objection with regard to the
parameters of the river samples is based on the presence of
iron. The analysis of the river water samples show that at
the upstream of discharge point, the iron was 0.55 mg/l, at
the confluence point, it was 0.44 mg/l and at the downstream
of discharge point, it was 0.37 mg/l. The drinking water
standard parameter of iron under the Drinking Water Standard
is 0.3 mg/l. Therefore, it is seen that at the effluent point and
downstream discharge point, it exceeds the standard
parameter i.e 0.3 mg/l. But at the same time, even the
parameter found at the upstream of discharge point is 0.55. If
that be so, when the parameter at the downstream of
discharge point and the effluent point, the iron is in excess of
the parameter found in the upstream, it makes absolutely

185
clear that the industry is not either responsible or contributed
for the excess iron content in the river water.
116. Similarly, the results of analysis of river sediment
as given in the report, show that heavy metal concentration is
meagre except for the iron concentration. The iron
concentration in the river sediment from upstream of
discharge point is 281 mg/l, sediment from confluence point is
286 while at the downstream of discharge point is 4.65 mg/l.
Even though river water and sediment analysis show that the
iron is in excess, based on that fact alone, it cannot be found
that it is due to the effluent being discharged by the industry.
It is more so, when the analysis of the waste water samples
collected from ETP and final outlet shows that the parameter
of iron found at the inorganic stream was 0.44 mg/l, and at
the organic stream was 2.52 mg/l. The parameter found at the
outlet of tertiary clarifier was 0.33 mg/l. At the same time, the
parameter found at the outlet of delay pond was 0.5 mg/l and
at the final disposal point it was 0.64 mg/l.

186
117. On the compliance of source emissions, the unit is
having 11 stacks attached to 3 boilers, bag filters attached to
DCP plant and DG sets. Source emission monitoring was
carried out at five stacks attached to different processes to
access the efficiency of Air Pollution Control Devices installed.
The source emission monitoring result shows the parameters
for particulate matter at the firewood boiler was 105
mg//Nm3, at the biogas & LSHS DCP drier-2 was 128
mg/Nm3,, at biogas fired DCP-I was 93.8 mg/Nm3, , at bag
filter drier 1 was 34.3 mg/Nm3, , at bag filter drier II was 424
mg/Nm3.. The standard fixed by KSPCB is 150 mg/Nm3.
Sulphur Dioxide found at biogas & LSHS DC Drier -2 was 160
mg/Nm3, at biogas fired DCP1 was 113 mg/Nm3, while it was
not found at the biogas filter drier 1 and drier II. The
conclusion is that the unit is meeting emission standards with
respect of firewood boiler and bag filter -1 and the particulate
matter concentration is exceeding 2.8 times than the
stipulated standard at bag filter 2. It indicates that the bag
filters installed are inadequate to control particulate matter
emissions to meet the norms.

187
118. To meet the odour management, the unit has
taken the following measures:
1. The crushed bone is stored in closed shed.

2. The crushed bone processing is carried out in
closed shed.
3. The duct system is provided in crushed bone
storage and pre-treatment area and the sucked
air is treated through bio filters 1 and 2 as
observed by the team.
This indicates that the bio-filters are working satisfactorily.
119. On the hazardous waste management, it is reported
that the unit has provided hazardous waste storage yard
having concrete flooring and stored in designated storage
yard and disposed of as per the authorisation conditions.
120. On the Ambient Air Quality monitoring, it is inferred
that the parameters PM10, SO2, and No2 are meeting with 24
hourly National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

188
121. ETP Sludge Management: The report shows that the
average quantity of sludge generated per day is 15 to 18
tonnes/day. The unit is found stored with huge quantity of
sludge in bio-compost yard and left unutilized in a shed
covered on three sides by tarpaulin. It is found that due to non
issuance of licence from local Panchayat, the bio-compost
process was stopped its operation since two years and the
unit was disposing the sludge as nutrisoil at Kaliyapuram
village, Palakkad District which is located at a distance of
about 98 kms upto March 2016. The CPCB team inspected the
dumpsite at Kaliyapuram and found that huge quantity of
sludge was dumped in open area and left unutilized. The
samples from sludge dumpsite and at sludge storage yard of
the industry were collected to check for any heavy metal
contamination. The results of the analysis of the sludge from
the sludge dumpsite and sludge drier are as follows:
Table 7 : Analysis results of sludge from sludge dumpsite

and sludge drier
Sl. Parameter Sludge Sludge Sludge Specification

from from from bio- s of Organic
No
dumpsite sludge compost Fertilizer as
drier yard per notified
Fertilizer
189
(Control)
order, 1985
1 Arsenic mg/L BDL BDL BDL 10.00
2 Copper mg/L BDL 0.08 0.20 300.00
3 Cadmium BDL BDL BDL 5.00

mg/L
4 Total 0.15 0.43 BDL 50.00

Chromium
mg/L
5 Iron, mg/L 1.66 377 1.38 -
6 Manganese, 1.64 4.59 3.13 -

mg/L
7 Nickel, mg/L 0.10 0.15 0.11 50.00
8 Lead, mg/L BDL BDL BDL 100.00
9 Zinc, mg/L 0.50 0.25 0.79 1000.00
10 Cobalt, mg/L BDL 0.07 BDL -
11 Mercury, The analysis is under progress.

mg/L
BDL: Below Detection Limit.
122. In conclusion, it is reported that the concentration
of heavy metals is within the standards of organic fertilizer.
The unutilized sludge accumulated over a period of time in the
Kaliyapuram area is severely affected by rains and the analysis
of sludge, confirms the same, which is highly dangerous to

190
surrounding environment. The sludge generated by the unit
was earlier used as bio-compost for agricultural purpose. The
analysis results are compared with the Standards in the
Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 notified by Government of
India, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development,(Department of Agriculture & Co-operation) New
Delhi dated 25.09.1985. The process of analysis of mercury
was not completed when the report was filed. After filing of
the report, the report of the mercury analysis was submitted
by the CPCB, which shows that the mercury contents of the
sludge from dumpsite (Kaliyapuram) is 0.025mg/kg, river
sediments at upstream point is 0.025 mg/kg, at confluence
point is 0.04 mg/kg, at downstream point it was 0.24mg/kg
respectively, while it was 0.148 mg/kg at the sludge from
sludge drier, 0.08 mg/kg at the bio-compost yard and the
mercury content of organic Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 is
0.15 mg/kg. Based on this analysis, the CPCB concluded that
the concentration of mercury in all the samples is well within
the standards prescribed in the Specifications of Organic
Fertilizer except at downstream sediment. The sludge
generated by the industry was earlier used as bio-compost for

191
agricultural purpose. As the analysis results are compared with
the standards in the Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985, the
following suggestions were made:
Although from the analysis it is inferred that the

sludge is non-hazardous in nature , the industry
shall not store any of the sludge generated from
ETP in open area in the premises as well as at
the surrounding environment. The industry shall
ensure proper storage and safe disposal of
sludge generated. The industry shall
compulsorily carry out third party analysis
through NABL accredited analysis laboratory
for determination of presence of mercury in HCL
before using in the process.
123. It is the specific case of the industry that they are
not using any HCl containing mercury. According to the
industry, they are purchasing the HCl from M/s. Travancore
Cochin Chemicals Ltd (TCC) Kochi and M/s. Chemplast Sanmar
Limited. Therefore, there is no possibility of any mercury
concentration in the sludge. There is no material to show that
the HCl alone purchased by the Industry is containing mercury.
Moreover from the report of the analysis of mercury as stated
in the report of CPCB, it is clear that the excess of mercury
found in the discharge point of the industry cannot be

192
attributed to the industry. The report also shows that the
quality analysis tests for mercury are done by the industry for
HCl in their quality control laboratory. The HCl analysis record
for the period from 21.09.2016 to 04.10.2016 indicates that
concentration of mercury is nil. It is evidently clear from the
CPCB report that the industry shall compulsorily carry out third
party analysis through NABL accredited laboratory for
determination of presence of mercury in HCl before using in the
process.
124. As per the Consent, the industry is permitted to
draw 3000 m3 per day of water from river Chalakkudy. The
industry has installed flow meters to measure the quantity of
water intake from the river. The records are maintained in log
book and same was cross verified. During inspection, the rate
of water consumption was in the range of 2933-2974 m3/day.
There is no separate flow meters installed to quantify the water
consumption for processing and domestic purpose. As per
the condition of the Consent order, the industry is permitted to
discharge treated effluent about 3000 m3/day .To quantify the
effluent discharge per day at the final disposal point, no

193
separate flow meter was installed. During inspection the CPCB
found that the treated effluent is diluted with backwash water
of sand filter before discharging into the river. MLSS
concentration found in the aeration tank was 736 mg/l.
According to CPCB, it indicates the re-circulation of sludge from
secondary clarifier to aeration tank is not proper. The
concentration of Ammonical Nitrogen at the final outlet was
52.9 mg/l slightly higher than the standard fixed by KSPCB (50
mg/l). It was also found that the dilution of TDS, COD and
Chlorides concentration from 4014 mg/l to 2944 mg/l, 331mg/l
to 47 mg/l, and 2323 mg/l to 1663 mg/l respectively due to
the dilution of the treated effluent from delay pond with
backwash water of sand filters before discharging into the
river. So also, the concentration of TDS and Chlorides at final
outlet is 2944 mg/l and 1663 mg/l which are very high when
compared to drinking water standard limit. It is also found that
there is no mechanism installed to detect leakage/breakage in
the conduit carrying treated effluent to a distance of 900
meters and that too, it passes through the irrigated land and
canal and final outlet is submerged 5 meter below in the river.
It was also reported that as the industry has stored huge

194
quantity of sludge in bio-compost yard and left unutilized in a
shed covered in three sides with tarpaulin , it may be lead to
fugitive emission. And the bio-compost process was stopped
since from two years due to non issuance of licence from local
Panchayat.
125. Based on these findings the CPCB provided the
following suggestions to the industry:
i. To obtain certificate of analysis from the HCl

suppliers indicating mercury concentration each
time whenever HCl is supplied to the unit;
ii. To conduct third party analysis through NABL

accredited Laboratory for presence of mercury
in HCl before using in the process;
iii. To install separate flow meters to quantify

the water consumption for domestic usage and
manufacturing process;
iv. To install flow meters at all the processing

unit to quantify the water utilized in each
process;
v. To draw fresh water from downstream side

of the unit and discharge the treated effluent
on upstream side;
vi. To install flow meters at ETP inlet and outlet

to quantify waste water generation and its
discharge to assess the actual quantification;
195
vii. To maintain the concentration of dissolved

oxygen & MLSS at the level of 1.0-1.5mg/l and
2500-3000 mg/l respectively to increase the
efficiency of aeration tank and to ensure proper
operation of biological treatment system;
viii. To ensure proper scientific operation and

maintenance of ETP to meet the standards
prescribed without dilution;
ix. To relay the existing discharge pipeline (900

mts) above ground level in time-bound
manner;
x. The facilities shall be provided at the outfall

point as per norms for inspection and as well as
for sample collection;
xi. To adopt appropriate technologies to recycle

the treated effluent at the maximum extent and
to minimize the discharge of effluent into the
river;
xii. To construct sewage treatment plant to

treat the domestic sewage generated within the
premises and to use the treated water for green
belt development;
xiii. To ensure the bio-gas generated from

anaerobic digester is utilized completely as fuel
and maintain records on daily basis;
xiv. To ensure the continuous operation &

maintenance (i.e.24 X 7) of bio filters in order
to avoid odour nuisance in unit premises;
xv. To refurbish the s tack as per Emission

Regulation Part III published by CPCB with
196
respect to safe guards, portholes & sampling

platform;
xvi. To phase out the usage of firewood in the

boilers and alternative fuel shall be used;
xvii. To augment the existing bag filters

adequately to meet the prescribed standards;
xviii. To operate the continuous ambient air

quality monitoring station as per norms at
appropriate location which is fee from
obstructions;
xix. To conduct ambient air quality monitoring

routinely at the boundary of premises to cover
all directions in addition to existing CAAQM
station; and
xx. To take necessary steps for removal and

safe disposal of unutilized sludge dumped at
Kaliyapuram at the earliest possible time.
126. In addition, the KSPCB was directed to (1) amend
the consent condition for installation of electromagnetic flow
meters at ETP inlet & outlet;(2) to meet the standards for TDS
and Chlorides in consent condition in tune with drinking water
standards as the treated effluent is discharged into the river;(3)
to instruct that no solid waste are to be stored and
accumulated anywhere unscientifically in the unit, even though
the ETP sludge is declared as non-hazardous. Similarly, the

197
sludge shall not be used for irrigation purpose in food crops as
per the directions of the Ministry of Environment and Forests
and Climate Change. The MoEF & CC directed the industry that
though the ETP sludge of the industry is found to be non-
hazardous, the sludge shall not be used for irrigation purpose in
food crops, to amend the consent condition for disposal of
sludge to TSDF site. As the sludge generated from the industry
was sent to the river, the standards for TDS and Chlorides
shall be included in the Consent condition and to conduct
sludge analysis as per Schedule II of Hazardous Waste
Management Rules, 2016 for ETP sludge generated from the
industry and based on the results of analysis, to amend the
conditions for sludge management in the Consent Order. The
arguments of the learned senior counsel for the applicants is
that in the absence of proper compliance, it cannot be found
that there was no disposal of the untreated effluent into
Chalakkudy river.
127. The main crux of the arguments of the learned
senior counsel appearing for the applicants is that there has

198
been no material balance or water balance as undertaken by
the industry and without proper balancing of the materials used
and the effluent generated, it is not possible to properly find
out the pollution being caused by the industry. The argument is
that the total raw materials consumed by the industry is
115.048 TPD, which includes 74 TPD of crushed bone, 81.4
TPD of HCl (since 68% is water content in HCl, the actual
quantity of HCl is 26.048 TPD) and 15 TPD of hydrated lime.
The permitted quantum of the product is 62.1 TPD consisting
of 13.3 TPD of Ossien, 8.3 TPD of limed Ossein, 40.5 TPD of
Di-calcium Phosphate and therefore, the balance out of the
raw materials used deducting the permitted quantum of
products, namely, 52.948 TPD should be the process waste
generated by the industry and annually, the total generated
waste would be 19326.02 tonnes. It is pointed out that
according to the form submitted by the industry, for getting
approval for organic fertilizer sold by it, the total annual
production capacity per day is 7 MT and per annum is 2600
MT. It is pointed out that as per the verification form of the
PCB dated 23.06.2012, the industry is permitted to generate a
total of 18,000 MT of ETP waste, of which 2/3rd is converted as

199
nutri soil and 1/3rd is sold to outside parties as semi solid
sludge, for which two numbers of biogas plants are installed.
So, it is argued that 12000 MT is cleared to be sold as
nutrisoil and 12,000 MT is to be used in the biogas plants. It is
therefore argued that there is a gap of 1326.02 TPA between
the waste generated by the industry and the waste permitted
to generate from the ETP. Though the case of the industry is
that the sludge generated from the industry is sold as compost
and even if it is assumed that 12000 TPA of sludge is converted
and sold as fertilizer, there is no accounting for 7326.02
(19326.02 12000) TPA of solid waste. It is also found out
that as per the details furnished in the report of NEERI dated
May 2014, regarding the raw material consumption and
product details, the total raw material consumed during 2008-
2009 is 48314.12 TPA including crushed bone 32134 TPA , HCl
31841 TPA and hydrated lime 5991 TPA and the total waste
generated is 25205.12 TPA. The total waste that can be
accounted for is only 18,000 TPA of ETP sludge, out of which
only 12000 TPA can be converted into fertiliser and therefore,
deducting the maximum fertilizer that can be produced, namely
12,000 TPA, the waste unaccounted is 13205.12 TPA. It is also

200
pointed out that similar data furnished for the year 2009-2010
shows that the total raw material consumed is 44,904.36 TPA
and the total production including Ossein 3159 TPA, Limed
Ossein 3194 TPA and DCP 14862 TPA and deducting it from
the total raw materials consumed, the total waste generated
would be 23,689.36 as 12,000 TPA is the maximum fertilizer
that can be produced, according to the applicants, the
unaccounted waste is 11,689.36 TPA (23689.36 12,000 ) It
is also pointed that that for the year 2010-2011, the waste
unaccounted is 11,097.44 TPA and for the year 2011-2012 it
would be 8975.96 TPA and for the year 2012-2013, the total
raw materials consumed was 44904.36 TPA and the total
production was 21979 TPA and therefore, the balance of
22925.36 should be the total waste generated and deducting
the maximum fertiliser that can be produced i.e. 12000 TPA,
the waste unaccounted for was 10925.36 TPA. It is argued that
there is no accounting for the actual waste generated from the
process and how many tonnes of fertilizer has been sold
during these years have not been disclosed to find out the
exact quantity of unaccounted waste generated.

201
128. Learned counsel pointed out that as per the reply of
KSPCB furnished on an application under RTI Act, the total
sludge generated is 750 tonnes per annum. But the report of
CPCB shows the sludge generated from the ETP is only 15 to
18 TPD and this translates to 5475 to 6570 TPA and, if this is
the quantum of sludge generated from the ETP, there is a great
variance in the material balance and there should be a proper
balancing of the raw materials and the waste generated.
Learned counsel argued that the unaccounted waste, in fact, is
illegal discharge into the Chalakkudy river without permission
and thus the river water is polluted.
129. The industry denied this allegation. Learned Senior
Counsel pointed out that the industry maintained a strict
material balance. The argument is that the gross material
consumption is 170.5 TPD consisting of 74 TPD of crushed
bone, 15 TPD of lime and 81.4 TPD of Hydrochloric Acid. Out of
these, the HCl concentration used is 30% and 70% is water
and therefore, the net quantity of HCl is only 24.4 TPD and
thus, the net quantum of material consumed is only 113.4 TPD.
Learned Senior counsel pointed out that the dried Ossein

202
production is 13.3.TPD and wet Ossein required for gelatin
production is pumped into the liming plant, where it is treated
with lime for 35-45 days and treated lime as a whole is
transported to the gelatine unit for gelatine manufacture and
the limed Ossein production is 8.3 TPD.
130. The Mono-calcium Phosphate (MCP) generated
during acidulation is pumped to the Di-calcium Phosphate
(DCP) plant and treated with hydrated lime solution for
converting MCP to DCP at pH 5.6 to 5.8 The settled DCP slutty
is filtered, dried, packed and stored in closed storage yard. The
DCP production is 40.5 TPD. The sinews and bone meal
separated during crushed bone pre-treatment and is converted
to meat meal by dry process and wet process. Learned Senior
counsel pointed out that the dry form is packed and sold to
local farmers as meat meal. The meat meal production is 1
TPD. The bone meal separated after crushed bone washing is
cooked with steam and dried and sold to the farmers as
sterilized bone meal, which has since been stopped. Therefore,
it is pointed out that the total production is 63.1 TPD, namely,
13.3 TPD of Ossein, 8.3 TPD of limed Ossein, 40.5 TPD of DCP
203
and 1 TPD of meat meal. The waste generated is treated in the
ETP. It is pointed out that after the process of waste generated
in organic stream, the next process is degradation of organic
compounds in the anaerobic digester 1 and 2 and 21 TPD
equivalent of solid substance is converted into biogas at the
rate of 3000 cu.m. per day and in the inorganic stream, the
effluent is treated in the flash mixer, followed by Flocculator,
Primary clarifier, Diffused Air Flocculator, followed by Aeration
tank and the sludge from primary clarifier is taken into
thickener followed by Rotary Vaccum Drier, filter press and
sludge drier and the final sludge generated together in organic
stream and inorganic stream amounts to 25 TPD. The effluent
from DAF 1 and 2, further undergoes secondary and tertiary
treatment and finally discharged into the Chalakkudy river after
treatment. Further, during pre-treatment of crushed bone 3.5
TPD of bone meal and sinews is generated. Therefore, it is
clear that the total waste generated would be 28.5 TPD.
Approximately 21 TPD equivalent mass of biogas is generated
in the anaerobic reactor and therefore, the total output would
be 112.6 TPD, almost equal to the input and therefore, there
is material balance.
204
131. Learned Senior counsel pointed out that the
argument of the learned counsel appearing for the applicants
that there is no material balance and there is unaccounted
waste, is based on the erroneous presumption that the
arithmetic difference between the raw material consumption
and production amount to waste. But, it does not take into
account the loss of mass during the manufacturing process in
liquid and gaseous state and it does not take into account the
mass equivalent of the biogas being generated in the
anaerobic reactors and if this is taken into account there is
material balance.
132. Learned counsel further argued that the industry
is permitted to generate 18000 TPA of solid waste, amounting
to 49.31 TPD and the waste generated has always been within
the said parameter and though the report submitted by KSPCB
shows that the sludge generated from the ETP is only 15 to 18
TPD, it is not based on the scientific measurements and thus,
contrary facts are stated by the applicants.

205
133. The case of the applicants is that as the maximum
capacity of two anaerobic bio-digesters at the rate of 930 cu.m
per day would be only 1860 and not 3000 as claimed by the
industry and the effluent from DCP stream is not treated in the
bio-digesters and the industry has no other treatment system
in place to remove dissolved solids, suspended solids present in
the effluent stream and in addition, 3.5 tonnes of waste is
generated from bone processing. Even according to the
industry, the first anaerobic digester was commissioned only on
22.03.2014 and the second digester was commissioned during
October, 2015. The industry has not explained how the huge
volume of sludge and waste was managed before and after the
installation of the digesters. It is the case of the applicants that
biogas is a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide and the
biogas from the digestion of raw effluent from the Ossein plant
and sludge from the primary clarifier and secondary clarifier of
the ETP is expected to have a composition of roughly 65% of
methane and 35% of carbon dioxide Converting approximately
21 TPD of solid substance to biogas, it would generate atleast
21 TPD of biogas. It is also pointed out that according to the
industry, the pair of digesters that convert the raw effluent

206
from the Ossein plant directly to biogas generates 1500-3000
m3 per day per tank. Therefore, the total capacity of the biogas
plants would be 3000-6000 m3 per day. So, it is argued that to
fully account for converting approximately 21 TPD of solid
substance to biogas, the other pair of digesters processing
sludge from the primary clarifier and the secondary clarifier of
the ETP would need to have the capacity to generate the
remainder of the biogas, i.e.at least 12000 15000 m3 per
day and in fact, the biogas plants for processing sludge from
the primary clarifier and the secondary clarifier of the ETP
have the capacity to generate the biogas at a rate of 12000-
15000 m3 per day, which is not possible. The applicants had
calculated the production capacity to generate biogas based on
the dimension and the height of the tanks as furnished by the
industry, namely, each tank has a diameter of 8 M and height
of 7 M. It was therefore argued by the applicants that each
digester can hold only 352 cu.m of effluents and can digest
only a maximum volume of 704 M3 in both the digesters in
46 hours and therefore, the claim of the industry about the
conversion of 21 MT of solids into biogas on daily basis can
never be correct. It is argued that considering the capacity of

207
two digesters, the maximum volume they can process is
11,019 M3 effluent in 30 days. The argument, therefore, is
that there is a net shortfall in the treatment capacity of 42,981
M3 effluent and therefore, there is a clear mismatch of the
input and the waste generated. This conclusion was based on
the diameter and the height of the tank of the digesters. The
industry filed a memo on 06.01.2017 pointing out that the
actual diameter of each tank is 18 meters and not 8 meters
and there was a clerical error in the written submissions filed
earlier, based on which, the applicants have contended that
there is mismatch between input and the waste generated. To
make the matter clear, the industry has filed an additional
reply showing that the anaerobic digesters convert
approximately 21 TPD of solid substance to biogas. It is
pointed out by the industry that the bio digesters are fitted
with flow meters and the flow of the effluents into the
digesters can be measured. The total quantum of effluent
generated in the organic and inorganic stream was
approximately 2900 cu.m per day and out of this, the sludge of
1860 cu.m per day of effluent from the organic stream is
processed and 21 TPD equivalent of solid is converted to

208
biogas. It is pointed out that totally there are 4 digesters, in
the ETP system. Out of this, one pair of digesters converts the
raw effluent from the Ossien plant directly to biogas and the
raw effluent from the equalization basin/effluent collection tank
is directely fed into the anaerobic digesters and another pair of
digesters converts feed from the primary clarifier and the
secondary clarifier to biogas. According to the industry, at the
inlet of raw effluent fed into the bio-digesters, the TSS is 3757
mg/l and the discharge at the outlet is 975 mg/l. So also, the
TDS at the inlet is 12611 mg/l and outlet is 5860 mg/l and
Chloride at the inlet is 4587 mg/l and at the outlet is 4587
mg/l. The TDS - Chlorides at the inlet is 8024 mg/l (12611
4587) and at the outlet is 1273 mg/l (5860 4587) and the
flow rate at the inlet is 82.6 m3/h. According to the industry,
the inlet sludge is a total of 23.36 TPD, namely, 3757 TSS X
82.6 (Average flow rate per hour) X 24 (Hours) = 7.45 MTD;
TDS minus chlorides = 8024 X 82.6 X 24 = 15.91 (7.45 MTD
+ 15.91 MTD). So also, the outlet sludge is a total of 4.45
TPD namely, 975 TSS X 82.6 (Average flow rate per hour) X
24 (Hours) = 1.93 MTD; TDS minus Chlorides = 1273 X 82.6 X
24 = 2.32 ( Total -1.93 + 2.32). Thus, the total outlet sludge

209
is 4.45 MTD. It is the case of the industry that the difference
between the above two values would be the amount of solid
mass converted to gas. Therefore, the total mass of solid
substance converted into gas is 18.91 MTD (23.36 TPD 4.45
TPD and the sludge processed in the biogas plant feed from
the primary clarifier and the secondary clarifier together would
come to 2.8 MTD and the grand total from all plants would be
18.91 MTD + 2.8 MTD = 21.71 MTD . Therefore, it is clear that
21 MTD equivalent amount of solid substances is converted to
biogas.
134. The applicant filed a memo dated 07.01.2017 in
response to the document, namely, Technical Specifications of
the Biogas Plant, produced by the industry, contending that the
industry has to state the capacity of each anaerobic reactor,
the flow of rate of each anaerobic reactor, the retention time,
the effluent parameter of the effluent inflow from the organic
stream, the quantity of biogas generated from the process and
the ratio of BOD, COD oxidised and biogas produced. It is
argued that as per the report of NEERI dated May, 2014, the
reactor designed for a flow rate of 930 M3 per day with

210
hydraulic retention time of 42 hours and the anticipated
methane generation from the bioreactor is 0.45 m3 per kg of
COD oxidised and therefore, the retention time of 42 hours will
be taken into account while computing the biogas produced
and COD oxidised. It is also argued that as per NEERI report
dated May 2014 where the effluent parameter is provided, the
BOD to COD ratio with Ossein is shown as 0.42-0.48 and DCP
0.90-0.92 and it is not believable that the raw effluent from
the DCP plant alone have BOD and COD levels, which ought
to be much higher. Even if the figures stated therein are
correct, the total effluent generated from the Ossein plant is
83.90 cu.m.per hour, which would be 2013.6 cu.m per day
equivalent to 2013600 litres and as per the report of NEERI,
the TSS is 3757 mg/l and TDS is 12611 mg/l and the total
solids load of 16.358 g/l of effluent and the total solid, thus,
would be 16.358 X 2013600 , namely, 32938468.8 grams or
32948.4688 kilograms or 32.9384 tonnes. The total solid load
in the DCP effluent stream would be 1127.5 mg/l with TSS
and 28267.5 mg/l of TDS and thus, the total of solid load would
be 29.395 mg/l and the total effluent from DCP stream as
provided is 33.50m3/hour, which is 804 cu.m. per day or

211
804000 litres a day. According to the applicants, the total
solids present in the DCP stream is 804000 X 29.395. The
argument is that the total solids present in both the streams
together would be 32.9384 + 23.63358 tonnes, which amounts
to 56.57198 tonnes and even as claimed by the industry, if 21
tonnes of solids equivalent of biogas is produced, there would
be a balance of 35.57198 tonnes of solids, which is not being
treated. The argument is that as per the contentions of the
industry, the total final sludge generated from the organic and
inorganic stream amounts to 25 TPD only. 3.5 tonnes of solids
which would equivalent of 21 TPD, was broken down in the
biogas plant generating biogas and thus, the total production
would be 63.1 TPD, which is claimed to be equal to the input.
The applicants would contend that even in that case, the total
solids present in the organic and inorganic stream is 56.57198
tonnes, much more than the permitted input of 150.048 TPD.
It is also argued that the waste balance propounded by the
industry is grossly incorrect and even if 21 tonnes is broken
down in the anaerobic digester out of 32.9384 tonnes of solids
in the organic stream, 11.9384 tonnes a day remains from the
organic stream and the waste from pre-treatment of bones is

212
3.5 tonnes a day and together with the waste from the
inorganic DCP stream, the total would be 39.07198 tonnes a
day of waste remains and therefore, in any event,10.57198
tonnes a day of waste is unaccounted. The applicants would
also contend that it is impossible to process 3000 cu.m per day
at the anaerobic digester as there is a delay time of 42 hours
also to be taken into account. The argument is that from the
table furnished in the NEERI report dated May 2014 COD is
8635 mg/l and the total COD present is 2013600 litres
equivalent to 17387436 grams or 17387.436 kilograms and the
total volume of methane generation at the rate of 0.45 M3 per
kg of COD oxidised is only 7824.3462 M3 and if that is to be
correct, there should be 100% oxidisation of COD which will
not occur in any anaerobic reactor. It is also contended that
there is no basis or substance on the assertion of the
applicants that 21 TPD equivalent of solid substances is
converted into biogas and therefore, it is quite clear the
industry is not accounting huge quantity of untreated effluent ,
which is clandestinely being discharged into Chalakkudy river
and therefore, necessary directions are to be issued.

213
135. The industry clarified the suspicion created by the
applicant by filing written submissions, pointing out that the
methodology adopted by the applicant based on TSS and TDS
is not correct and he has not taken into account the various
critical aspects. It is pointed out that the total input is 113.4
TPD and the total product is 63.1 TPD. The total sludge
generated is 25 TPD, Bone meal and sinews generated is 3.5
tonnes per day and if 21 TPD equivalent solid substance is
converted into biogas, as claimed by the industry, the output is
also equal to the input and there is no unaccounted balance as
canvassed by the applicants. It is pointed out that the bio-
digesters are fitted with flow meters and the flow of the
effluents into the bio-digesters can be measured and the
total quantum of effluent generated in the organic and
inorganic stream is approximately 2900 cu.m. per day and out
of this effluent, the sludge in 1860 cu.m. per day from the
organic stream is processed and 21 TPD equivalent of solid is
converted into biogas. The industry pointed out that there are
a total of 4 bio-digesters in the ETP system and one pair of
digesters converts the raw effluent from the Ossein plant
directly to the biogas. The raw effluent from the equalization

214
basin/effluent collection tank is directly fed into the anaerobic
digesters. The other pair of digesters converts feed from the
primary clarifier and the secondary clarifier to biogas. The
Industry pointed out that TDS and TSS and Chlorides in raw
effluent fed into the bio-digesters and that in the outlet of the
bio-digesters, as per the report of NEERI dated May 2014, TSS
is 3757 mg/l and at the outlet 975mg/l, TDS is 12611 mg/l and
at the outlet 5860 mg/l, Chloride is 4587 mg/l and at the outlet
4587 mg/l. The Chlorides are same at the inlet and outlet, as
they do not undergo conversion in the bio-digesters. The TDS-
Chlorides (TDS minus Chlorids) at the inlet is 8024 and at
the outlet is 1273. The flow rate is 82.6 m3/h The inlet sludge
of TSS should therefore be 3757 X 82.6 X 24 hours which
would be 7.45 MTD. The TDS minus chlorides at the inlet
would be 8024 X 82.6 X 24 , which would be 15.91 TPD.
Therefore, the total inlet would be 23.36 TPD. At the outlet,
according to the industry, TSS would be 975 X 82.6 X 24
hours, which would be 1.903 MTD,TDS minus Chlorides would
be 1273 X 82.6 X 24 hours = 2.32 TPD. Thus, the total outlet
would be 4.45 TPD.

215
136. The argument is that the difference between the
above two values would amount to solid mass converted into
gas and therefore, the total mass of solid substance converted
into gas would be 23.36 TPD 4.45 TPD, namely 18.91 MTD.
It is pointed out that the sludge processed in the biogas plant
fed from the primary clarifier and the secondary clarifier, in
the inlet would be 80 m3 per day X 4 %, namely 3.2 MTD and
in the outlet would be 80 m3 per day X 0.5 %, namely 0.4 MTD
and thus, the total quantity converted is 2.8 MTD. Learned
counsel appearing for the industry thus, would submit that the
grand total from all the plants would amount to 21.71 MTD and
from the above calculations, 21 MTD equivalent amount of solid
substance is converted into biogas and therefore, the
contention that there is no material balance, canvassed by the
learned counsel appearing for the applicants, is not correct.
137. Reports of the NEERI and the CPCB would
establish that the wash water generated by washing of crushed
bone after the pre-treatment is directly fed into the ETP and
after the washing, the crushed bone goes to the acid bath for
treatment with 4% concentrated HCL to produce Ossein and

216
from there, the Ossein is taken to the paddle washer for
washing and removing free acid and impurities. In the paddle
washer neutralization of ossein is conducted using hydrated
lime. After neutralization, Ossein is dried and packed. The
Mono calcium phosphate generated from acidulation process is
pumped to DCP Plant to manufacture DCP and treated with
hydrated lime solution for conversion of MCP to DCP and the
impurities from the DCP plant are taken to the ETP Plant. DCP
slurry is filtered using Rotary Drum Vacuum filter (RDV), dried
and packed and stored. The filtrate and supernatant generated
during the process is sent to ETP through open drain and the
effluent is taken to equalization basin of DCP and equalised
process effluent goes to flash mixer and then taken to
Flocculator1 and 2 , primary clarifier and thereafter to aeration
tank 1 and from there to the secondary clarifier and then
again to flash mixer and then to Flocculator and then to tertiary
clarifier and then to collection tank, and from there to the
sand filter and then to delay pond and then to collection tank.
The treated water is reused . The treated effluent from the
collection tank and the polishing pond, back wash water from
the sand filter are discharged into the Chalakkudy river. From
217
the neutralization basin, the processed effluent goes to the
buffer tank and from there to the anaerobic tank and from
there the Lamella Clarifier and from there, it goes to flash
mixer. Therefore, the flash mixer receives effluent from the
DCP: process as well as from the Ossein process and from the
flash mixer, it goes to Flocculatorfrom where it goes to Primary
clarifier 1 and 2 where biogas is produced by oxidation of COD.
138. The applicants originally attacked the case of the
industry that 21 TPD equivalent of solid substance is converted
into biogas based on the details furnished by the industry
regarding the diameter of the bio digesters. Instead of 18 m, it
was wrongly shown as 8 meters. The mistake in mentioning
the actual diameter of the bio-digester was corrected and
thereafter, the calculation of the capacity of biogas was
furnished by the industry and on going through the entire
aspect of the matter, we cannot agree with the case of the
applicants that 21 TPD biogas was generated from the bio-
digesters. As pointed out by the industry when the total
quantum of solids excluding the chlorides which do not
undergo any conversion in the biodigesters, the inlet sludge

218
would be 23.36 TPD while the outlet sludge would be 4.45 TPD.
Therefore, the difference is 18.91 MTD, which was necessarily
the total mass of solids converted into biogas. In addition to
that, the solid processed in the biogas stream from the primary
clarifier and the secondary clarifier as contended by the
industry is taken into consideration, the total quantity
converted would be 18.9 TPD + 2.8 TPD = 21. 7 TPD, which
would corroborate the case of the industry that 21 TPD of total
substance is converted into biogas. Therefore, it could be seen
that when the quantity of material consumed by the industry is
113.4 TPD, the total waste generated would be 28.5 TPD and
when the quantity of waste converted to biogas at the bio-
digesters is taken into consideration, namely, 21 TPD, the total
out put would be 112.60 TPD and therefore, we do not find any
difference in the material balance as alleged by the applicants.
139. Therefore, on the analysis of the entire facts and
materials, we hold that there is no material to establish that
the industry has discharged sludge along with the treated liquid
effluent into the Chalakkudy river. The sludge generated by the
industry is non hazardous and non toxic. The Effluent

219
Treatment Plant is functioning efficiently and as of now the
discharge of the treated effluent from the ETP to the
Challakudy river has no adverse impact on the river water or
the ground water. The points are answered accordingly.
140. Point No.7: From the materials produced and
evaluated earlier, it is clear that before the commissioning of
the digesters, the industry could not have treated the entire
effluent to achieve the prescribed parameters. But, that
position has now been changed as the industry has already
started commissioning the bio-digesters. Hence, we find no
scope for the earlier grievance, provided the ETP including the
bio-digesters are working properly to their optimum. At the
same time, based on the findings recorded in the report
submitted by the CPCB in the Original Application 412 of 2016,
(PB) and in the light of the materials available, we find it
necessary to issue certain directions for remedying the injury
caused to the environment and also to completely avoid
causing any pollution by the operation of the industry. The
industry had stocked huge quantity of sludge generated at
Kaliyapuram dumpsite in Palakkad district and left it

220
unutilized and unattended. Even though the presence of
mercury found in the sludge cannot be attributed to the
respondent industry and the sludge is non toxic and non
hazardous, the sludge when left unattended, would necessarily
cause pollution of the ground water. The industry is, therefore,
bound to remove the same from the site and dispose it in
accordance with the rules without further delay. As no
balancing of the materials and the water used and discharged,
based on the permissible quantity as provided in the order of
Consent granted by the Pollution control board, it is also
necessary to direct the KSPCB to conduct a proper water
balancing and material balancing to check any portion of the
untreated effluent being discharged into the land or water
body. To facilitate proper balancing of materials and water, it is
necessary to direct the industry to install flow meters of the
processing units to account the exact quantify the water drawn
as well as discharged.
141. Therefore, based on the above materials discussed
including the reports submitted by the NEERI, KSPCB and
CPCB, and applying the precautionary principle to avoid any

221
possibility of causing pollution to both air and water in the
environment, we find it necessary to issue the following
directions:
i. The respondent industry M/s.Nitta Gelatin India
Ltd. shall install separate flow meters to quantify
the water consumption for domestic usage and
manufacturing process.
ii. The respondent industry shall install flow meters
at the process limit to quantify the water
utilised/processed.
iii. The respondent industry shall install flow meters
at the ETP inlet and outlet to quantify the waste
water generation and its discharge to assess the
actual quantity.
iv. The respondent industry shall maintain the
concentration of dissolved and MLSS at the level of
1.0 1.5 mg/l and 2500 3000 mg/l respectively,
to increase the efficiency of aeration tank and also
to ensure proper operation of biological treatment
system.
222
v. The respondent industry shall ensure proper
scientific operation and maintenance of ETP to meet
the prescribed standards without dilution.
vi.The respondent industry shall adopt appropriate
technologies to recycle the treated effluent to the
maximum extent and to minimise the discharge of
effluent into the river.
vii. Ultimately, the respondent industry shall make
every effort to achieve Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD)
to the extend possible.
viii. The respondent industry shall construct a
sewage treatment Plant to treat the domestic
sewage generated within the premises. The treated
effluent from the sewage treatment plant shall be
used for gardening and for the development of
green belt.
ix. The respondent industry shall ensure that the
biogas generated from anaerobic digester is utilised
completely as fuel. They shall maintain records of

223
the biogas generation, which is utilised as fuel on
daily basis.
x. The respondent industry shall ensure continuous
operation and maintenance of the bio filters to
avoid any odour nuisance in the premises of the
industry.
xi. The respondent industry shall refurbish the
stack as per Emission Regulation Part III published
by CPCB with respect to safe guards and sampling
platform.
xii. The respondent industry shall phase out the
usage of fire wood in the boilers and alternative
eco-friendly fuel only shall be used.
xiii. The respondent industry shall augment the
existing bag filters adequately to meet the
prescribed standards.
xiv. The respondent industry shall operate the
continuous Ambient Air Quality monitoring system

224
as per the norms at the appropriate location, which
is free from obstructions.
xv. The respondent industry shall re-lay the
existing discharge pipeline, which takes the treated
effluent from the ETP to the Chalakkudy river,
above the ground level in a time bound manner.
The re-laying of the discharge line shall be done in
such a way as to discharge the treated effluent
upstream side, while making arrangement to draw
fresh water from downstream side.
xvi. The respondent industry shall take immediate
steps for removal and safe disposal of unutilised
sludge dumped at Kaliyapuram of Palakkd district,
within four months from the date of this judgment.
The industry shall also take steps for the removal
and safe disposal of all sludge generated and stored
within the premises of the industry, within a period
of six months.
xvii. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board
(KSPCB) shall amend the conditions in the Consent

225
granted to the respondent industry, providing
installation of electro-magnetic flow meters at the
ETP inlet and outlet.
xviii. The KSPCB shall amend the conditions in the
Consent granted to the industry to include
standards for TDS and Chlorides in tune with the
standards prescribed for drinking water for the
treated effluent discharged into Chalakkudy river,
as it is a source of drinking water for the public.
xix.The KSPCB shall closely monitor the working of
the industry and see that no solid waste including
the sludge generated in the industry is stored and
accumulated un-scientifically anywhere in the
premises of the industry.
xx. The KSPCB shall also take steps to see that the
sludge generated by the industry is not used for
irrigation purpose in the food crops, in accordance
with the instructions of MoEF & CC.

226
xxi .The KSPCB shall amend the condition in the
Consent order for disposal of sludge to TSDF site.
xxii. The KSPCB shall inspect the industry within a
month, from the date of the judgment, and shall
file a status report before the Tribunal, which shall
be placed before the Bench.
xxiii. Thereafter the KSPCB shall inspect the
industry once in every three months and monitor
the working of the industry its progress in the
implementation of the directions issued and its
effect on the environment and ecology and submit
a quarterly report before the Tribunal.
xiv. The KSPCB shall conduct periodical audit of the
materials consumed and the effluents discharged
by the industry. Such audit is necessary for
balancing the materials including water
consumption and the effluents being
discharged/disposed, so as to avoid any possibility
of polluting the water, environment and ecology.

227
142. The applications are disposed accordingly with no
order as to costs.
Justice M.S.Nambiar
Judicial Member
P.S.Rao
Expert Member

Kathikudam Case Before The National Green Tribunal (2015)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kathikudam Case Before The National Green Tribunal (2015)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kathikudam Case Before The National Green Tribunal (2015)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

Application Nos. 305, 309 of 2013 and 149 of 2015 (SZ)

Application No.305 of 2013 (SZ)

IN THE MATTER OF:

3. Superintendent of Police (Rural),

4. Kerala State Pollution Control Board

6. Kerala Water Authority,

7. Centre for Water Resources

8. Nitta Gelatin India Limited,

Application No. 309 of 2013

5. Kerala Water Authority,

6. Nitta Gelatin India Limited,

Application No. 149 of 2015

1. The Union of India

2. The State of Kerala,

3. The Kerala Pollution Control Board

5. Nitta Gelatin India Limited,

Counsel appearing for the Applicant:

Mr. T. Mohan and A. Yogeeswaran for G. Stanley

Mr. T. Mohan and A. Yogeeswaran for M/s. Neha Miriam Kurian

Counsel appearing for the Respondents:

Smt. Suvitha A.S for R1 to R3 and R6 in Application No. 305 of

T. Naveen for R4 in Application No. 305 of 2013 and for R3 in

Mr. George Zachaiah for R7 in Application No. 305 of 2013

Mr. K. Anand Senior Counsel for M/s. B.S. Krishna Associates,

HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE M.S.NAMBIAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HONBLE SHRI P.S. RAO, EXPERT MEMBER

Delivered by Honble Justice M.S.NAMBIAR, Judicial Member

Dated: 27th February, 2017

Whether the Judgement is allowed to be published on the Internet Yes/No

Application No.305 of 2013 was filed under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India before the Honble High Court of

Kerala as Writ Petition No.15010 of 2012. The prayer was to

issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1

to 7 to ensure that there is zero liquid discharge to the

Chalakudy river by the 8th respondent, Nitta Gelatin India

Limited and to command respondent No.4, Kerala State

Pollution Control Board not to renew the Consent granted to

respondent No.8 without complying with the circular dated

09.08.2004 issued earlier regarding the siting parameters and

also for a direction to respondent No.7, Centre for Water

Resources Development and Management, Kozhikkode to

conduct a detailed study regarding the discharge of effluents by

respondent No.8 to the Chalakudy river and to ensure that the

functioning of respondent No.8 does not cause any

environment hazards to the residents of the locality. That Writ

Petition was filed by the applicant as Public Interest Litigation

claiming to be an affected person residing in the

neighbourhood of the industry of respondent No.8.

2. Application No.309 of 2013 was also filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India before the Honble High Court

of Kerala as Writ Petition No.26653 of 2012. That Writ Petition

was filed by the applicant as Public Interest Litigation with the

prayers to issue a writ of mandamus directing Nitta Gelatin

India Limited, respondent No.6 herein, the same respondent

No.8 in Application No.305 of 2013, to complete the pollution

control measures as per the Government Order dated

03.11.2011, at any rate by 01.01.2013 and also for a direction