2025 INSC 1341 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

INHERENT/CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SUO MOTO WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(S). 8 OF 2025

IN RE: 2 MILLION LIVES AT RISK,

CONTAMINATION IN JOJARI RIVER,

RAJASTHAN

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5517-5519 OF 2022

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8748 OF 2022

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 9057-9058 OF 2022

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 9010-9011 OF 2022

O R D E R

Mehta, J.

Table of Contents

I. Introduction ............................................................ 2

II. Overview of the Suo Moto Proceedings and the

Orders passed by this Court .......................................... 4

III. Status Report Filed by the State of Rajasthan .... 16

IV. Assessment of the State’s Submissions and

Identified Deficiencies ................................................. 27

2

V. Constitutional Framework: Right to Life and Right

to a Healthy Environment ........................................... 30

VI. Environmental Degradation of the river system:

Findings and Impact ................................................... 38

VII. Modification/Clarification of Interim Stay on the

National Green Tribunal’s Order: Legal and

Environmental Necessity ............................................. 42

VIII. Constitution of the High-Level Ecosystem

Oversight Committee ................................................... 45

IX. Terms of Reference and Powers of the High -Level

Ecosystem Oversight Committee .................................. 48

X. Administrative and Logistical Arrangements for

the Committee ............................................................. 58

XI. Operative Directions ........................................... 61

I. Introduction

1. The present proceedings involve issues of grave

concern and disastrous consequences, as a fallout of

apathy at all levels which has virtually put the lives

of 2 million people, animals and ecosystem of three

important rivers in western Rajasthan at peril. These

rivers are ‘Jojari’ which passes through Jodhpur, the

second largest city of Rajasthan; ‘Bandi’ which

passes through city Pali; and ‘Luni’ which passes

3

through Balotra with the latter two being hubs of

dyeing printing industry. Rivers ‘Bandi’ and ‘Jojari’

merge into river ‘Luni’ somewhere near Balotra city.

1

2. This Court has, over the years, been called upon

to examine innumerable issues pertaining to

environmental degradation, but the factual matrix of

this case stands out for the duration, extent, and

magnitude of the harm inflicted. What emerges from

the record is not an isolated incident nor an

accidental oversight, but a sustained, systemic

collapse of regulatory vigilance and utter

administrative apathy stretching over nearly two

decades.

3. The pollution of the aforementioned riverine

ecosystem, represent an assault not merely on

natural watercourses but on the constitutional

guarantees that animate and sustain the Indian

1

Hereinafter referred to as the ‘river system’.

4

Republic, i.e., the right to life, dignity, health, safe

drinking water, ecological balance, equality, and the

right of future generations to inherit an environment

capable of sustaining life. When environmental

degradation reaches such gargantuan proporti ons

that it strikes at the foundation of these guarantees,

the injury transcends the ecological realm and

becomes a direct constitutional injury requiring

immediate, comprehensive and effective judicial

redress.

II. Overview of the Suo Moto Proceedings

and the Orders passed by this Court

4. It is in this backdrop that this Court, by order

dated 16

th September, 2025, took suo moto

cognizance of a news documentary highlighting the

grave environmental catastrophe in the Jojari River

region. The documentary titled “2 Million Lives at

Risk | India’s Deadliest River | Marudhara |

5

Jojari | Rajasthan” exposed alarming levels of

industrial pollution, governance failures, and severe

public health consequences affecting nearly two

million residents across several districts of

Rajasthan. The said order recorded the factual

background, recognised the gravit y of the

environmental disaster, and sought response from

the State of Rajasthan.

5. Thereafter, when the matter came up for

hearing on 9

th October, 2025, this Court broadened

the horizon and considered the same issue of

pollution in rivers Bandi and Luni in addition to

Jojari. The Court noted multiple earlier proceedings

before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan

and the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench,

New Delhi culminating in detailed monitoring

committee reports and comprehensive directions

issued by the National Green Tribunal vide final order

6

dated 25

th February, 2022. This Court further took

note of the fact that several statutory appeals arising

out of the said order of the National Green Tribunal,

namely, Civil Appeal Nos. 5517-5519 of 2022; 8748

of 2022; 9057-9058 of 2022; and 9010-9011 of 2022,

were pending before this Court which involved issues

intrinsically connected with those being taken up in

the present suo moto writ petition. In order dated 9

th

October, 2025, this Court observed that considering

the commonalities of issues required to be dealt with,

in the suo moto writ petition and the pending appeals,

it would be expedient in the interest of justice, to

direct that these pending appeals be tagged and

heard together with the suo moto writ petition, while

directing that Civil Appeal No. 2901 of 2022 be de-

tagged as the issues therein were different.

Accordingly, the Registry was directed to place the

papers before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India to

7

seek a direction for analogous hearing of all the above

referred matters with the suo moto writ petition. For

ready reference, the said order is extracted

hereinbelow: -

“1. This suo moto writ petition was registered

pursuant to this Court’s order dated 16

th

September,

2025. By the said order, this Court took suo moto

cognizance of a documentary named “2 Million

Lives at Risk| India’s Deadliest River |

Marudhara | Jojari | Rajasthan” uploaded on the

YouTube by a channel named “News Pinch” on 12

th

September, 2025.

2. We have holistically examined the materials

provided to us and have also researched for the

orders which may have been passed in relation to the

same issue. We have found that for the very same

environmental issue, numerous writ petitions were

filed in the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan,

Principal Seat at Jodhpur, including Civil Writ Petition

Nos. 2844 of 2011 and 9503 of 2012. These writ

petitions were ultimately transferred to the National

Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi where

they were registered as Original Application Nos.

34(THC) of 2014 and 32(THC) of 2014.

3. The Gram Panchayat, Araba filed Original

Application No. 329 of 2015 before the National Green

Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in respect of

pollution in Jojari river which is the subject matter of

the suo moto writ petition.

4. We may note that as per the topography of the

area concerned, there are three rivers involved in this

environmental disaster. River Luni originates in the

Aravali range at Ajmer and flows through districts

Pali, Jodhpur, Barmer and then dissipates into the

Rann of Kutch. River Bandi is a tributary to river Luni

and runs through districts Pali, Jodhpur and Barmer

8

and ultimately joins river Luni. River Jojari flows

within the boundaries of district Jodhpur.

5. The Principal Bench of National Green

Tribunal, New Delhi, in order to resolve the serious

issues of pollution in these rivers constituted a Special

Task Force in an endeavour to control the industrial

pollution created by the textile and steel industries in

Jodhpur and the textile industries of Balotra and Pali

districts, which are adjoining the Jodhpur District.

6. Vide orders dated 23

rd

November, 2020 and

7

th

December, 2020, the Special Task Force was

abolished, and 3 separate monitoring committees

were created to monitor the pollution created by the

industries running in Jodhpur, Pali and Balotra

districts. Justice Prakash Chandra Tatia, (former

Judge of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan

and former Chief Justice of High Court of Jharkhand

at Ranchi) was appointed as the Chairperson of these

three Committees. The monitoring Committees,

identified the following common issues in all the

matters: -

• The effluents generated by the textile industries of

Jodhpur, Pali, Balotra, Jasol, and Bithuja;

• The effluents generated by the steel Industries at

Jodhpur;

• Sewage from Jodhpur, Pali, Balotra;

• Industries are of similar type, i.e., textile

industries exist at all three places along with steel

industries at Jodhpur. Also, CETP, Jodhpur is

common for these industries;

• Industrial and sewage waste, is being discharged

in rivers/tributaries Jojari, Bandi and Luni and

ultimately effluents are being discharged directly

or indirectly into river Luni;

• Affecting three adjacent areas, i.e., Jodhpur, Pali

and Barmer District;

• Common preventive measures for all polluters of

these three districts.

7. The monitoring committees, in its common

interim report dated 20

th

April, 2021, gave the

9

following suggestions for dealing with the pollution

disaster: -

• Relocation of Gandhipura, Balotra industries may

be considered by NGT.

• Underutilised CETPs should be fully utilised

immediately.

• Effluents at factory outlets must stay within

prescribed limits (in terms of both quantity and

quality) and SCADA meters with auto-cut to be

installed in all CETP member units in Jodhpur, Pali

and Balotra to be ensured within next three

months.

• Effluents at CETP outlets must also be maintained

within prescribed limits, with strict checking by

Trusts and Rajasthan State Pollution Control

Board (RPSCB).

• No mixing of CETP treated water with untreated

sewage or storm drains; responsibility lies with

CETP Trust and municipal bodies.

• Municipal bodies should have strict supervision of

all of their respective drains and manholes and

must ensure that no effluents/sewage enter

drains or manholes. Violations to attract action

under Section 133 Code of Criminal Procedure and

before RPSCB.

• If municipal bodies mix sewage/stormwater with

CETP effluents, CETP Trust must complain to

RSPCB for action against erring officer.

• Point Nos. 1-7 shall apply mutatis mutandis to

Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) and in STPs

where chlorination is not provided, municipal

corporations must install chlorination plants

immediately.

• SPCB has ultimate responsibility to check all

defaults referred above, regardless of who is

primarily responsible.

• Zero Liquid Discharge Policy (ZLD Policy) applies to

all and all the stakeholders, including municipal

bodies should be asked to furnish written

undertaking by what time they will fully obey this

policy and they be directed not to discharge

10

untreated, chemical or dyes or any effluents mixed

water in any river so as to take other effluents to

hundreds of kilometres.

• Regional Officer, RSPCB must identify all critical

discharge points into rivers by 7

th

May, 2021,

collect samples monthly and at any time via

surprise checks, and shall keep record readily

available for inspections of RSPCB’s higher

authorities. Regional Officer, RSPCB shall produce

monthly inspection reports before this or any

Committee as per direction of NGT. Also, the

respective Regional Officer, RSPCB should develop

a mechanism to upload the test results of the

samples which are collected at these critical points

on regular basis at the RSPCB website without

any delay so that they are available to public. The

monitoring and sharing of test results shall

continue till this direction is modified.

• Regional Officer, RSPCB shall take strict action

against any industry discharging effluents into

public/RIICO drains, rivers, or public places.

• Municipal bodies must submit better sewage

• management plans, uninfluenced by finances.

• Rajasthan Government should take a policy

decision to demarcate separate areas for “non-

polluting industries” and “polluting industries” for

better effluent management.

• Local administration should use Section 133 Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against continuous

public nuisance from effluents in congested areas.

• National Green Tribunal may consider whether

CETP should be treated as an extension of

industry premises since it handles unavoidable

external processing.

• All government departments (Industries

Department, Revenue Department, PHED,

Electricity, SPCB, local bodies, administration)

must discharge their legal duties independently

during all times uninfluenced by the monitoring

done by the Committee; committee o nly

supplements, not supersedes, their functions.

11

8. The monitoring committees gave its common final

report on 22

nd

July, 2021 stating that its interim

report dated 20

th

April, 2021 shall be read as part

and parcel of the final report. In the said final report,

the following recommendations were given: -

• SPCB and State must increase cadre strength of

SPCB and immediately fill all vacancies.

• Review laws and enforcement, collect data on

resumed agricultural lands, cancelled

leases/Pattas. If such actions were not taken,

State Government may be asked, why authorities

failed in enforcing laws and terms of conditions of

the leases and Khatedari Rights?

• All Regional Officers must report details of illegally

established industries on agricultural land to

Tehsildar, Jodhpur Development

• Authority, Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, and

Municipal Bodies of Pali and Balotra.

• For future, Regional Officers must promptly report

any illegally established industry on agricultural

land to Tehsildar, Jodhpur Development Authority,

Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, and Municipal

Bodies of Pali and Balotra for appropriate legal

action.

• All Tehsildars must register cases against persons

who are illegally using agricultural land for

industries and send case details to Regional

Officer, RSPCB without any delay.

• Tehsildars must provide Regional Officer with a

copy of the final order passed in such cases

immediately.

• In cases where Khatedari rights not cancelled or

land in question has not been resumed, Regional

Officer must send Tehsildar’s order to Member

Secretary, RSPCB, who must examine reasons

and, if necessary, advise Collector to challenge

within 15 days.

• A Monitoring Committee must oversee the progress

of CETP projects, construction of new STPs,

sewage lines/nallahs, and storm drainage works

12

to avoid delays, cost escalation, and financial

burden.

• Gram Panchayats, along with Revenue Officers

and Tehsildars, must prevent pollution and act

against industries on agricultural land within their

jurisdiction, with accountability fixed for failures.

• Municipal Corporations (Jodhpur, Pali, Balotra),

RIICO, and State must prioritize sewage

management, maximize water reuse

• after treatment, and ensure proper disposal of

non-reusable water for villages like Araba and

surrounding areas of about 40 km areas.

9. After receiving the aforesaid final report and

hearing the parties, the National Green Tribunal,

Principal Bench, New Delhi vide final order dated 25

th

February, 2022 issued the following directions: -

• The recommendations of Monitoring

Committee as contained in reports dated 20

th

April, 2021 and 22

nd

July, 2021, which is

already quoted shall be complied with by the

concerned authorities within 6 months.

• RSPCB shall ensure that no untreated, or

partly treated pollutant is discharged in

water or water bodies or land including

rivers in question, which do not comply with

the environmental laws and norms and any

industry including operators of ETP, STP or

CETP shall be closed/sealed, if violation is

found to have continued. For the period of

non-compliance including post violations,

environmental compensation shall be

determined by Competent Statutory

Regulators, against violators, on the

principle of ‘Polluter’s Pay’, after giving show

cause notice and opportunity and the said

amount of compensation shall also be

recovered. This entire exercise shall be

completed within 6 months.

• RIICO shall pay environmental compensation

of Rs. 2 Crores by depositing the same with

the Central Pollution Control Board.

13

• The local bodies/authorities of District

Barmer and Jodhpur each shall pay

compensation of Rs. 2 Crores within 15 days

with RSPCB and in case steps required to be

taken by them for stopping pollution for

complying with the directions mentioned

above within 6 months are failed, they shall

pay further compensation of above amount.

• The Statutory Regulators, in coordination with the

concerned District Magistrates shall make a

survey of respective areas of districts Jodhpur and

Barmer, prepare detailed exhaustive lists of

Industrial Proponents who are causing pollution,

air and/or water pollution. A regular monitoring

shall be observed by a Committee comprising

RSPCB, concerned District Magistrates and

Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA) and

appropriate remedial action including

assessment of compensation as well

prosecution shall be taken against the

violators.

• Amount of compensation deposited/recovered as

directed above, shall be utilised for remediation

and restoration of environmental damage. For this

purpose, a joint Committee comprising CPCB,

RSPCB, CGWA and District Magistrates Barmer

and Jodhpur shall finalize plan within two months

and execute the same within six months.

• Compliance report by respective

bodies/authorities in respect of directions as

above, shall be submitted by 30

th

September,

2022 with Registrar General, NGT. If any further

direction is required/needed or found necessary

the Registrar General, NGT shall place the matter

before the Tribunal.

10. Statutory appeals under Section 22 of

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, as per details

mentioned below have been filed in this Court against

the aforesaid order of National Green Tribunal,

Principal Bench, New Delhi wherein different orders

14

have been passed which are quoted hereinbelow for

the sake of ready reference: -

I. Civil Appeal Nos. 5517 -5519 of 2022:

RIICO v. Digvijay Singh & Ors. [Order dated 29th

August, 2022]

“Issue Notice. To be heard along with Civil

Appeal No.2901/2022. There shall be

interim stay. List after six weeks.”

II. Civil Appeal No. 8748 of 2022: Municipal

Council, Pali v. Kisan Paryavaran Sangharsh Samiti,

Jaipur & Ors. and Civil Appeal Nos. 9057-9058 of

2022: Nagar Nigam, Jodhpur v. Gram Panchayat,

Araba & Ors. [Order dated 21st November, 2022]

“Delay condoned. Issue notice. There shall

be interim stay in terms of the order passed

in Civil Appeal Nos. 5517-5519 of 2022 on

29.08.2022. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos.

5517-5519 of 2022.”

III. Civil Appeal Nos. 9010 -9011 of 2022:

Municipal Council, Balotra v. Digvijay Singh & Ors.

[Order dated 28th November, 2022]

“Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with

Civil Appeal No. 8748 of 2022.”

11. It is pertinent to note that Civil Appeal Nos.

5517-5519 of 2022 were directed to be heard along

with Civil Appeal No. 2901 of 2022 vide order dated

29

th

August, 2022. However, on perusal of records, it

is evident that the issues involved in Civil Appeal Nos.

5517-5519 of 2022 and the suo moto writ petition are

completely different from the issues involved in Civil

Appeal No. 2901 of 2022. Hence, Civil Appeal No.

2901 of 2022 shall be de -tagged and heard

separately.

12. Having considered the commonalities of

issues which we propose to deal in the suo moto writ

petition and the pending appeals, it would be

expedient in the interest of justice, to direct that these

pending appeals, i.e., Civil Appeal Nos. 5517-5519 of

2022; Civil Appeal No. 8748 of 2022; Civil Appeal

Nos. 9057-9058 of 2022; and Civil Appeal Nos. 9010-

15

9011 of 2022 should be clubbed and heard together

with the suo moto writ petition.

13. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to place

the papers before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India

for seeking direction of analogous hearing for all the

above referred matters with the suo moto writ

petition.”

6. On 7

th November, 2025, this Court, upon

hearing the submissions advanced by Mr. Shiv

Mangal Sharma, learned Additional Advocate

General for the State of Rajasthan, granted him a

weeks’ time to obtain instructions, in particular, as

to whether the Rajasthan State Industrial

Development & Investment Corporation Ltd. (RIICO),

Municipal Councils of Pali, Balotra and Jodhpur still

wanted to continue with their appeals. Learned

Additional Advocate General was further given liberty

to file status report indicating the steps taken by the

State and its instrumentalities in relation to the

environmental concerns raised in the present

16

proceedings. The relevant extract of the said order is

reproduced hereinbelow: -

“Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, learned Additional

Advocate General for the State of Rajasthan, seeks

a week’s time to obtain instructions in the

matter, in particular, about the fact whether the

Rajasthan State Industrial Development &

Investment Corporation Ltd. (RIICO), Municipal

Councils of Pali, Balotra and Jodhpur still want

to continue with their appeals.

List the matters again on 17.11.2025.

In the meantime, Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma,

learned AAG, may file status report.”

III. Status Report Filed by the State of

Rajasthan

7. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the State of

Rajasthan has placed on record a status report dated

15

th November, 2025, filed through the learned

Additional Advocate General. The Status Report,

accompanied by multiple annexures including

minutes of high -level meetings, photographs,

compliance communications, and proposed technical

action plans, delineating the steps undertaken by

17

various State agencies in response to the

environmental crisis as well as the State’s position

with respect to the pending appeals. A succinct

summary of the salient aspects of the said Status

Report is set out hereinbelow: -

• The State of Rajasthan has acknowledged the

critical issue of pollution of the river system and

has assured of its full compliance with all

directions and orders. The State has committed

to cooperating fully to resolve the issue in the

interest of public welfare.

• The State held discussions with the Municipal

Corporations of Jodhpur, Pali, Balotra, and

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and

Investment Corporation Ltd. (RIICO) regarding

pending appeals against the National Green

Tribunal’s final order dated 25

th February,

2022. All appellants agreed to allow the positive

18

directions of the National Green Tribunal to

continue without further stay and pledged to

work jointly and to assist this Court in resolving

the issue.

• The State has requested this Court to expunge

remarks made by the National Green Tribunal

against RIICO and other

authorities/Corporations. Additionally, the

State has sought relaxation of the

environmental compensation Rs. 2 Crores

imposed by the National Green Tribunal,

proposing that the liability be recovered from

the violating industrial units under the “Polluter

Pays” principle. The State also suggests that any

compensation or liability determined should be

exclusively utilized for pollution abatement and

restoration works.

19

• The State has requested this Court to implead

the three Common Effluent Treatment Plants

(CETPs) located in Jodhpur, Pali, and Balotra,

which are Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs)

constituted by the industries and are

responsible for the management and operation

of the said plants. This inclusion is deemed

essential for ensuring effective implementation

of this Court’s directions.

• The State has undertaken several urgent

measures following this Court taking suo moto

cognizance of the issue. Inspection drives in

Jodhpur during September-October, 2025 led

to the closure of 17 non-compliant industrial

units, while similar drives in Balotra on 19

th

September, 2025 -25

th September, 2025

resulted in the closure of 5 non-compliant units.

Additionally, 17 bypass lines discharging

20

wastewater into stormwater drains in RIICO

industrial area, Jodhpur, were removed, and

9 illegal units in Shobhavaton ki Dhani and

Salawas were demolished, with machinery

sealed in one unit. Joint teams have closed

down 77 illegally operating units in Balotra

on 15

th

-16

th

September, 2025. Efforts were

also initiated to clear waterlogging in

villages Doli, Araba, and Kalyanpur in Balotra

district, and regular inspections are being

conducted in Jodhpur, Pali, and Balotra to

identify and act against defaulters.

• A review meeting chaired by the Additional Chief

Secretary, Department of Environment &

Climate Change, Government of Rajasthan, was

held on 28

th August, 2025, to address

waterlogging in villages Doli, Araba, and

Kalyanpur and prevent discharge of

21

domestic/industrial wastewater into the Jojari

River. Key decisions taken during the said

meeting are as follows: -

a. RIICO providing details of industries

operating in Jodhpur;

b. RIICO to explore the feasibility of

establishing CETPs in RIICO industrial

areas;

c. RIICO and RUIDP to complete re -

tendering work of laying textile conduit by

30

th September, 2025;

d. Mandating the use of treated CETP water

by industries;

e. Expediting the establishment of CETP of

suitable capacity at Salawas after

assessing present technical and capacity

requirements;

22

f. Local Self Government Department to

prepare a plan for discharge of treated

sewage of STP, Salawas in river Luni;

g. RIICO and Local Self Government

Department to initiate efforts for

controlling the discharge of untreated city

sewage in the river through open drains

and to divert untreated city sewage to

STPs; and

h. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

(RSPCB) to continue with its action

against unauthorized industries

discharging untreated wastewater in river

Jojari.

• On 3

rd November, 2025, RSPCB issued letters to

BITS Pilani, MNIT Jaipur, and IIT Jodhpur to

conduct performance audits of CETPs in

Jodhpur. The audit aims to assess performance

23

efficiency, compliance with discharge

standards, adequacy of treatment units, and

operational gaps. Institutions are required to

submit proposals and conduct audits within 4-

6 weeks.

• On 6

th November, 2025, RSPCB issued letters to

MNIT Jaipur, IIT Jodhpur, and MBM

Engineering College, Jodhpur to prepare short-

term and long-term action plans for pollution

control in rivers Jojari, Luni, and Bandi. Short-

term actions include rotational closure plans,

completion of conduit lines, installation of

analysers and flow meters, SCADA upgrades,

and regular inspections. Long-term actions

include upgrading CETPs to Zero Liquid

Discharge (ZLD), constructing additional CETPs

and STPs, and implementing sustainable water

reuse and monitoring systems.

24

• RSPCB directed CETP Trust to submit a

rotational closure/roster plan to regulate

effluent discharge within the capacity of the

conduit pipeline. Progress on laying new

conduit pipelines is being reviewed, with

completion expected by 31

st March, 2026.

Additionally, a Special Task Force (STF) will be

constituted within seven days to oversee the

execution of current and future plans.

• Current Status of STPs and CETPs:

a. Jodhpur: Estimated sewage generation is

230 Million Litres per Day (MLD), with

existing facilities including 2 STPs and 1

oxidation pond (total capacity: 120 MLD).

Three STPs with a capacity of 65 MLD are

under construction, and two STPs with a

capacity of 15 MLD are proposed. Treated

25

and untreated sewage is discharged

into River Jojari.

b. Pali: Estimated sewage generation is 32

MLD, with two STPs (total capacity: 22.5

MLD) and a sewage treatment gap of 10

MLD. Treated and untreated sewage is

discharged into River Bandi.

c. Balotra: Estimated sewage generation is

12.5 MLD, with one STP (9 MLD capacity).

Treated and untreated sewage is

discharged into River Luni.

d. CETPs: Jodhpur has 81 steel units and

306 textile units with separate CETPs

having capacity of 1.5 MLD and 18.5 MLD

respectively but the same are operating

below capacity, i.e., at 0.60-0.65 MLD and

10-11 MLD respectively. Pali has 497

textile units and two CETP s having

26

capacity of 12 MLD each but operating at

only 5-6 MLD, while Balotra has 955

textile units and three CETPs (total

capacity: 54.5 MLD) operating at the

capacity of 19 MLD, way below its

capacity.

• Expert institutions (MNIT Jaipur, IIT Jodhpur,

and MBM Engineering College Jodhpur) have

been tasked with formulating a comprehensive

plan for river rejuvenation, industrial effluent

management, sewage treatment, and ecosystem

restoration. Preliminary frameworks are to be

submitted within the prescribed time, with final

plans presented to be placed before this Court

within 6-8 weeks.

27

IV. Assessment of the State’s Submissions

and Identified Deficiencies

8. We are pained to observe that these remedial

measures have been triggered by the suo moto

cognizance taken by this Court vide order dated 16

th

September, 2025, whereas the State should have

acted spontaneously years ago, for ensuring around

the clock compliances which is the constitutional

obligation of the State Government and the

concerned authorities. While the status report

reflects that the State of Rajasthan has, woken up

from its slumber subsequent to this Court’s suo moto

cognizance, and has undertaken several measures,

including closure of non-compliant/illegal industrial

units, removal of bypass lines, demolition of

unauthorised establishments, initiation of

inspections, convening of high -level meetings,

commissioning of expert institutions, and proposals

28

for infrastructural augmentation, but at the same

time, it is evident that these steps have been taken

only as a sequel to this Court’s intervention. While

these measures are not insignificant, their timing is

deeply telling. The long-standing environmental

devastation afflicting the river system and the

adjoining areas as a result of decades of continuous,

unchecked discharge of industrial effluent and

municipal sewage, suggests that sustained

regulatory vigilance and timely administrative action

were lacking in the preceding years. The belated

flurry of administrative activity, triggered solely by

fortuitous judicial intervention, underscores a

prolonged period of regulatory apathy and

institutional neglect. The efforts now set in motion,

though welcome, must therefore be viewed as the

beginning of a process that requires continued

29

commitment and not as an adequate response in

themselves.

9. Furthermore, the status report itself discloses

that the installed capacities of the Sewage Treatment

Plants and Common Effluent Treatment Plants

operating in Jodhpur, Pali and Balotra are grossly

inadequate when compared with the volume of

sewage and industrial effluents generated on a daily

basis, resulting in the inevitable overflow and

discharge of untreated or partially treated sewage

and effluents into the river system. This mismatch

between generation and treatment capacity,

persisting for years, is emblematic of a systemic

failure to create and maintain environmental

mitigation infrastructure commensurate with

industrial expansion. The acknowledged deficiencies

in capacity, utilisation, maintenance and monitoring

only underscore the inadequacy of the current

30

regulatory and supervisory framework and the urgent

necessity of a comprehensive, coordinated and

scientifically informed intervention. In view of these

admitted shortcomings, this Court is of the

considered opinion that the existing infrastructure as

well as the statutory and regulatory framework falls

far short of what is required to arrest continuing

ecological degradation and to safeguard the

fundamental rights of the affected population.

V. Constitutional Framework: Right to Life

and Right to a Healthy Environment

10. In assessing the State’s response to the grave

ecological degradation afflicting the river system and

the adjoining areas, this Court is constrained to

reflect on the deeper constitutional and

jurisprudential principles that govern the

relationship between the State, the environment, and

the citizen. Environmental harm of the present

31

magnitude is not merely a regulatory lapse or

administrative shortcoming; it is in gross dereliction

of the constitutional promise that the State shall

secure conditions of life with dignity, safety and well-

being. Polluted rivers, contaminated groundwater,

and the resulting impairment of health and livelihood

dilute the very substance of the right to life as

enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of

India, reducing it from a living guarantee into a fragile

abstraction. Where environmental injury pe rsists

despite statutory frameworks and institutional

mechanisms, it becomes necessary to re-anchor the

inquiry in the foundational doctrines that this Court

has painstakingly developed over several decades. It

is in this backdrop that the principles articulated in

this Court’s earlier decisions must again be revisited

to guide the present exercise.

32

11. This Court, in Subhash Kumar v. State of

Bihar

2

, has held that the right to life under Article 21

necessarily embraces the right to live in a pollution-

free environment. The Court observed that a citizen

is entitled to invoke Article 32 when environmental

degradation threatens the quality of life. This

articulation has since remained a foundational

principle of environmental jurisprudence in India.

Relevant extract of the said judgment is reproduced

hereinbelow: -

“7. Article 32 is designed for the enforcement of

Fundamental Rights of a citizen by the Apex Court.

It provides for an extraordinary procedure to

safeguard the Fundamental Rights of a citizen.

Right to live is a fundamental right under Art 21

of the Constitution and it includes the right of

enjoyment of pollution free water and air for full

enjoyment of life. If anything endangers or

impairs that quality of life in derogation of laws,

a citizen has right to have recourse to Art. 32 of

the Constitution for removing the pollution of

water or air which may be detrimental to the

quality of life. …..”

[Emphasis supplied]

2

(1991) 1 SCC 598.

33

12. A similar exposition was made by this Court in

Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana

3

, wherein this

Court recognised the right to a clean and hygienic

environment as an indispensable facet of the right to

life. The Court further emphasised the constitutional

imperative upon State Governments and municipal

bodies to safeguard, protect and improve both the

natural and man -made environment. In a

comprehensive articulation of the State’s

constitutional duties, this Court held:

“7. … The State, in particular has duty in that

behalf and to shed its extravagant unbridled

sovereign power and to forge in its policy to

maintain ecological balance and hygienic

environment. Article 21 protects right to life as

a fundamental right. Enjoyment o f life and its

attainment including their right to life with

human dignity encompasses within its ambit,

the protection and preservation of environment,

ecological balance free from pollution of air and

water, sanitation without which life cannot be

enjoyed. Any contra acts or actions would cause

environmental pollution. Environmental,

ecological, air, water, pollution, etc. should be

regarded as amounting to violation of Article 21.

Therefore, hygienic environment is an integral

3

(1995) 2 SCC 577.

34

facet of right to healthy life and it would be

impossible to live with human dignity without a

humane and healthy environment. Environmental

protection, therefore, has now become a matter of

grave concern for human existence. Promoting

environmental protection implies maintenance of

the environment as a whole comprising the man -

made and the natural environment. Therefore,

there is a constitutional imperative on the State

Government and the municipalities, not only to

ensure and safeguard proper environment but

also an imperative duty to take adequate

measures to promote, protect and improve both

the man-made and the natural environment. ”

[Emphasis supplied]

13. This Court in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath

4

,

reiterated that Articles 48A and 51A(g) of the

Constitution of India are not abstract constitutional

exhortations but must be read harmoniously with

Article 21. The Court held that any disturbance of the

basic environmental elements that are indispensable

to life, such as air, water and soil, strikes at the heart

of the right to life itself. Relevant extract of the said

judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: -

“8. Apart from the above statutes and the rules made

thereunder, Article 48-A of the Constitution provides

that the State shall endeavour to protect and

4

(2000) 6 SCC 213.

35

improve the environment and to safeguard the

forests and wildlife of the country. One of the

fundamental duties of every citizen as set out in

Article 51-A(g) is to protect and improve the natural

environment, including forests, lakes, rivers and

wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.

These two articles have to be considered in the light

of Article 21 of the Constitution which provides that

no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty

except in accordance with the procedure established

by law. Any disturbance of the basic environment

elements, namely air, water and soil, which are

necessary for “life”, would be hazardous to “life”

within the meaning of Article 21 of the

Constitution.”

[Emphasis supplied]

14. This Court again, in A.P. Pollution Control

Board II v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu

5

, affirmed that the

right to a healthy environment forms an integral part

of the right to life. The Court recognised

environmental rights as part of evolving “third

generation” rights, observing that:

“7. Our Supreme Court was one of the first Courts

to develop the concept of right to ‘healthy

environment’ as part of the right to "life" under

Article 21 of our Constitution. [See Bandhua Mukti

Morcha v. Union of India (1984 (3) SCC 161)]. This

principle has now been adopted in various countries

today.

8. In today’s emerging jurisprudence,

environmental rights which encompass a group

5

(2001) 2 SCC 62.

36

of collective rights are described as “third

generation” rights. The “first generation” rights are

generally political rights such as those found in the

International Convention on Civil & Political Rights

while "second generation" rights are social and

economic rights as found in the International

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

"Right to Healthy Environment". (See Vol.25) 2000

Columbia Journal of Environmental Law by John

Lee P.283, at pp.293-294 fn.29).”

[Emphasis supplied]

15. Taken together, the principles emerging from

the foregoing judgments establish beyond doubt that

environmental protection is not a matter of

administrative choice but a constitutional

imperative. This Court has consistently affirmed that

the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to

a clean, healthy and ecologically balanced

environment; that Articles 47 and 48A impose a

substantive obligation upon the State to safeguard

public health and protect the environment; and that

Article 51A(g) casts a corresponding duty upon every

citizen to preserve and improve the natural

environment. The jurisprudence of this Court

37

articulates a coherent doctrinal framework in which

environmental rights are recognised as integral to

human dignity and sustainable development. These

decisions, read together, leave no room for ambiguity:

where environmental degradation threatens life,

health and ecological balance, the State must act

with urgency, competence and foresight, and

constitutional courts are duty-bound to intervene

when such obligations are not met. It is in the light

of the aforesaid well-established constitutional

jurisprudence that this Court must now turn to the

persistent and grave contamination of the river

system and the adjoining areas of the State of

Rajasthan, assess the adequacy of the measures

undertaken by the State, and determine the scope of

remedial directions necessary to vindicate the

constitutional rights of the affected communities and

38

restore the environmental integrity of the entire

region.

VI. Environmental Degradation of the river

system: Findings and Impact

16. The material placed before this Court leaves no

doubt that the contamination of the rivers system has

caused profound and multi-dimensional harm to the

people, ecology and economy of the region. What were

once seasonal rivers sustaining agriculture, wildlife

and village life have, over the years, turned into

conduits for untreated industrial effluents and

municipal sewage. The pollution has permeated soil

and groundwater, rendering agricultural lands

unproductive, polluting wells and handpumps, and

depriving entire communities of access to safe

drinking water. Livestock, on which thousands of

families depend, has suffered extensive morbidity

and mortality. The disappearance of local fauna and

39

the degradation of riverine ecology bear testimony to

the scale of environmental injury. These harms are

not speculative or remote; they are immediate,

continuing and borne daily by residents whose

health, livelihoods and dignity have been

compromised for nearly two decades.

17. What exacerbates this crisis is the prolonged

period of administrative indifference during which

pollutants including untreated industrial effluents

and municipal sewage continued to be discharged

unabated, despite repeated warnings, judicial

directives and scientific reports. The Justice P.C.

Tatia Committee, constituted earlier in the course of

proceedings before the National Green Tribunal, had

laid bare the regulatory deficiencies, the systemic

non-compliance by CETPs, and the persistent

discharge of untreated waste into river channels

continues. The salutary remedial recommendations

40

of the Committee did not translate into effective

action on the ground. Successive inspections by

statutory authorities recorded the same deficiencies

year after year, revealing a cycle in which violations

were noted but not rectified.

18. It is our firm opinion that, with due deference to

the stay granted by this Court, the State Government

could have continued with the process of checking

the flow of untreated effluents into the river system.

If at all there was any genuine grievance of RIICO or

the concerned authorities, they should have made an

effort to seek modification or clarification of the order.

However, utter apathy prevailed, and the stay

granted by this Court was used as an excuse to sit

idle and allow the devastation to continue unabated.

It is only after this Court initiated suo moto

proceedings in September, 2025 that the State

machinery has woken up and claims to have initiated

41

some enforcement measures. The protracted inaction

that preceded these steps has allowed the pollution

to deepen and spread, thereby aggravating the harm

to millions of citizens. We find that the efforts so

initiated touch only the tip of the iceberg.

19. In the face of such entrenched environmental

degradation, delay is not merely undesirable; it is

carcinogenic and catastrophic. The river system in its

present state continues to threaten public health,

undermine agricultural sustenance, and

contaminate natural resources that form the

backbone of ecology and life in the region.

Environmental injury of this magnitude cannot be

reversed by knee jerk reactions, incremental

compliances or symbolic enforcement. It requires a

coordinated and scientifically informed response

grounded in the precautionary principle, sustainable

development and the inter -generational equity

42

doctrine, i.e., the principles which have consistently

guided this Court’s environmental jurisprudence.

Immediate action is not only warranted but

constitutionally mandated, as each passing day

without effective intervention risks further

irreparable harm to the environment and to the

people whose lives are intertwined with it.

VII. Modification/Clarification of Interim Stay

on the National Green Tribunal’s Order:

Legal and Environmental Necessity

20. It is in this context that the continuance of the

interim stay on the National Green Tribunal’s final

order dated 25

th February, 2022 becomes untenable.

The National Green Tribunal’s order was passed after

an extensive fact-finding exercise and in furtherance

of the detailed recommendations of the Justice P.C.

Tatia Committee, which had identified the precise

regulatory failures and technical shortcomings

43

requiring redress. The stay on the National Green

Tribunal’s directions has, in effect, has been

misinterpreted to freeze the implementation of the

remedial framework designed to arrest ongoing

pollution and rehabilitate the river system. The

setback of several years during which the effluents

continued to pollute the environment may well be

irreversible. Allowing the stay to persist would defeat

the very purpose of the statutory mechanism under

the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010; the Water

(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and

would undermine the detailed fact-finding efforts,

and perpetuate the illegality that has caused

widespread harm. In these circumstances,

modification/clarification of order granting stay is

not only called for but also imminently essential to

facilitate implementation of the remedial measures

already devised and to ensure that the constitutional

44

rights of the affected population are protected

without further delay.

21. Furthermore, the learned Additional Advocate

General appearing for the State of Rajasthan has

fairly submitted that RIICO and the other concerned

authorities/Corporations have no objection to the

vacation of the interim stay, provided that the stay

continues to operate in respect of the remarks made

against them and the direction imposing

environmental compensation. Accordingly, the stay

operating on the National Green Tribunal’s final order

dated 25

th February, 2022 is modified and clarified

insofar as it tends to restrain the implementation of

the substantive remedial and regulatory directions

issued by the Tribunal. However, the interim stay

shall continue to operate only in respect of the

remarks made against RIICO and the other

authorities/Corporations, and in respect of the

45

direction imposing environmental compensation of

Rs. 2 Crores upon them. These issues shall remain

under consideration and will be examined at an

appropriate stage, having due regard to the future

actions, conduct and compliance demonstrated by

the said authorities/Corporations.

VIII. Constitution of the High-Level Ecosystem

Oversight Committee

22. With the stay on the National Green Tribunal’s

final order now modified and clarified and the

remedial framework envisaged therein revived for

implementation, it becomes necessary to ensure that

such measures are carried out in a coherent,

sustained and scientifically supervised manner.

Hence, in view of the long-standing environmental

degradation, the prolonged administrative inaction

and the urgent need for a coordinated, scientifically

informed and accountable institutional mechanism

46

enabling this Court to oversee the restoration of the

river system, it is our considered opinion that a

dedicated fact -finding, monitoring and

implementation body must now be constituted.

Accordingly, to detect the fundamental maladies in

the system, to supervise the remedial measures

required to arrest further pollution and to give long

term suggestions for reversal of the damage already

caused, we deem it appropriate to constitute a High-

Level Ecosystem Oversight Committee , consisting

of the following: -

• Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sangeet Lodha , Hon’ble

(Retd.) Judge of High Court of Judicature for

Rajasthan as Chairperson;

• Shri Pankaj Sharma, Advocate, High Court of

Judicature for Rajasthan to assist the

Chairperson;

47

• Technical Expert of repute in the fields of water

management, pollution control and/or

environmental engineering to be identified and

appointed by the Chairperson;

• Additional Chief Secretary, Department of

Environment & Climate Change, Government of

Rajasthan;

• Joint Secretary, Urban Development and

Housing Department, Government of

Rajasthan;

• Joint Secretary, Local Self Government

Department, Government of Rajasthan;

• Member Secretary, Central Pollution Control

Board or his/her nominee;

• Member Secretary, Rajasthan State Pollution

Control Board (RSPCB) or his/her nominee;

48

• Managing Director, Rajasthan State Industrial

Development and Investment Corporation Ltd.

(RIICO);

• Director, Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure

Development Project (RUIDP); and

• District Collector of Jodhpur, Pali and Balotra.

The constitution of this Committee is necessitated by

the scale of the harm, the complexity of the remedial

actions required, and the imperative of ensuring

sustained institutional oversight so that the

directions of the National Green Tribunal, as well as

those of this Court, are implemented in both letter

and spirit.

IX. Terms of Reference and Powers of the

High-Level Ecosystem Oversight

Committee

23. In formulating the mandate of the Committee,

this Court has taken note of the status report filed by

49

the State of Rajasthan, which discloses that several

premier educational institutions, such as IIT

Jodhpur, MNIT Jaipur and MBM Engineering

College, Jodhpur, have been engaged to prepare

short-term and long-term action plans for river

rejuvenation, industrial effluent management,

sewage treatment and ecological restoration. In order

to avoid duplication of efforts and to ensure that the

scientific and technical recommendations generated

by these institutions translate into effective and

actionable outcomes, it is directed that all such

short-term and long-term plans, proposals, feasibility

assessments and technical frameworks shall be

submitted directly to the High-Level Ecosystem

Oversight Committee, which shall examine their

practicality, financial viability and environmental

efficacy. The Committee shall thereafter formulate

implementation strategies, set timelines and

50

supervise the execution of all measures

recommended therein.

24. The High-Level Ecosystem Oversight Committee

shall operate with the following broad Terms of

Reference: -

A. The Committee shall oversee and ensure full,

faithful and time-bound implementation of the

directions contained in the National Green

Tribunal’s final order dated 25

th February,

2022, including those issued based on the

recommendations of the Justice P.C. Tatia

Committee.

B. The Committee shall prepare a scientifically

grounded, time-bound River Restoration and

Rejuvenation Blueprint for the river system that

includes Rivers Jojari, Luni and Bandi and

formulate a comprehensive plan for its

execution in coordination with the St ate

51

Government and concerned

authorities/agencies. This plan shall

incorporate scientific, technical and

administrative measures for remediation of

contaminated topsoil, rejuvenation of

groundwater aquifers, restoration of river

ecology, revival of flora and fauna, prevention of

future contamination, and long -term

environmental monitoring.

C. In order to accurately map the sources of

pollution, the Committee may conduct a

comprehensive on ground survey of every

discharge point, pipeline, drain, channel or

outlet that leads into the Jojari, Bandi or Luni

rivers or any of their tributaries. The Committee

shall identify all legal and illegal discharge

points, determine the nature of effluents

released through each of them, and ascertain

52

whether such discharges comply with statutory

standards. The Committee shall also verify that

all member units connected to CETPs have

installed and are continuously operating

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

(SCADA) meters equipped with automatic cut-

off mechanisms, and that the data generated by

these meters is being regularly monitored by the

Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

(RSPCB) and the CETP Trusts. It shall further

ensure that treated effluents from CETPs are

not mixed with untreated sewage or stormwater

at any stage and that municipal bodies take

necessary steps to prevent any such mixing.

The Committee shall place before this Court a

detailed report of its findings and the

recommendations regarding the remedial

53

measures required to be undertaken in this

regard.

D. The Committee may, with the assistance of

suitable expert bodies, examine the feasibility of

making all existing SCADA meters fully online

and integrated into a common monitoring

dashboard to enable effective and continuous

oversight and real time data mon itoring of

discharge of industrial effluents. The Committee

shall also assess the feasibility of installing

SCADA meters, or any other compatible

monitoring devices, at all Sewage Treatment

Plants (STPs) so that the quantity and quality of

effluent discharged from such plants can be

monitored on a real-time basis. The Committee

shall place its recommendations on these

aspects before this Court.

54

E. The Committee may schedule and conduct

audits including surprise checks of the CETPs,

STPs, oxidation ponds, drainage systems,

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

(SCADA) units and industrial primary treatment

plants at appropriate intervals. The Committee

shall specify compliance benchmarks and

ensure that non-compliance is addressed

promptly.

F. The performance audits of Common Effluents

Treatment Plants (CETPs) and Sewage

Treatment Plants (STPs) undertaken by

educational institutions engaged by the State of

Rajasthan shall be submitted to the Committee,

which shall examine the findings, direct

remedial measures and ensure that deficiencies

identified in the audits are rectified without

delay.

55

G. All action plans, technical reports, feasibility

studies and remedial proposals prepared by IIT

Jodhpur, MNIT Jaipur, MBM Engineering

College, BITS Pilani or any other institution

engaged by the State shall be placed before the

Committee. The Committee shall evaluate the

scientific soundness, feasibility and

environmental efficacy of each recommendation

and give its suggestions on their

implementation.

H. The Committee shall assess the existing

treatment capacity vis-à-vis actual industrial

and municipal discharge and prepare a time-

bound infrastructural augmentation plan. This

may include, wherever necessary, the

installation of new CETPs or STPs,

enhancement of existing capacity, creation of

additional conveyance pipelines, adoption of

56

Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) technologies, and

establishment of integrated waste management

systems.

I. The Committee shall identify officials,

authorities or industries/industrial units

responsible for non-compliance or dereliction of

their obligations. Upon identification of such

individuals and/or industries/industrial units,

the Committee shall recommend appropriate

disciplinary action, prosecution under

applicable statutes, and/or recovery of

environmental compensation, as the facts may

justify. It shall ensure that the principle of

“Polluter Pays” is applied effectively and that no

violator is permitted to escape liability.

J. The Committee shall ensure that RSPCB

publishes quarterly water quality data and that

periodic engagement is undertaken with

57

affected Gram Panchayats and local

communities to integrate ground-level feedback

into enforcement mechanisms. It shall prepare

recommendations based on local grievances,

field observations and stakeholder inputs to

ensure that remedial measures address th e

lived realities of affected populations.

K. The Committee shall have full authority to call

for records, issue directions to State and local

bodies, seek technical assistance from national

institutions including but not limited to

National Environmental Engineering Research

Institute (CISR-NEERI) and ensure strict

implementation of all environmental

safeguards.

L. The Committee shall also be at liberty to

examine and address all such matters as may

be incidental, ancillary or consequential to the

58

aforesaid Terms of Reference. This shall include

any issue which, in the considered view of the

Committee, bears a nexus with the prevention

of pollution, restoration of the river ecosystem,

augmentation of treatment infrastructure, or

enforcement of environmental norms. The

Committee shall have full authority to take such

steps as are reasonably necessary to secure the

objectives of the directions issued by this Court

and to ensure that the environmental and

constitutional rights of the affected

communities are effectively safeguarded.

X. Administrative and Logistical

Arrangements for the Committee

25. The Committee shall be provided with all

necessary secretarial, technical and administrative

support to ensure the effective discharge of its

mandate. For this purpose, at the initial stage, the

59

State of Rajasthan shall make available services of

one Rajasthan Administrative Services (RAS) Officer

to act as Registrar and the Nodal Officer of the

Committee, one Personal Assistant (PA), one Lower

Division Clerk, one Law Clerk and two Class IV

employees to be assigned at the discretion of the

Hon’ble Chairperson. The Committee may conduct its

proceedings at Jodhpur or at any other location

deemed appropriate by the Chairperson, and the

State Government shall ensure that suitable

arrangements for its sittings are made forthwith. The

Committee shall be free to evolve its own modalities

and procedure for the conduct of its business. The

State Government shall provide a fully furnished and

well-equipped office space, preferably within the

Circuit House, Jodhpur, or at any other location

specified by the Chairperson and the same shall be

equipped with video-conferencing facilities and such

60

additional infrastructure as may be required. All

logistical arrangements necessary for the functioning

of the Committee shall be completed on or before 9

th

December, 2025.

26. The State Government shall bear all financial

and logistical requirements of the Committee,

including the payment of honorarium and

operational expenses. The Chairperson shall be

entitled to an honorarium of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees

Five Lakhs Only) per month, and the lawyer assisting

the Committee shall be paid honorarium of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) per month.

The Chairperson shall also be entitled to travel

allowances equivalent to those admissible to a sitting

Judge of the High Court for th e purposes of

Committee meetings and site visits. The lawyer

assisting the Committee shall be paid travelling

allowance of Rs.10,000/- per visit (for inspection).

61

The State Government and the police administration

shall provide full security to the Chairperson

throughout the duration of the Committee’s

mandate, including during field inspections.

Adequate security measures shall also be put in place

for the field visits of the Committee. Expenditure

incurred towards the functioning of the Committee

including the payment of honorarium, professional

expenses, operational expenses and any other

ancillary expenses shall be recoverable from the

concerned erring officials or departments, and from

the industries or industrial units found to be

responsible for violations leading to pollution of the

river system.

XI. Operative Directions

27. The directions that follow are a concise

distillation of the conclusions reached in the

62

foregoing sections of this order. They are being issued

to give concrete effect to the principles, findings, and

obligations already discussed, and to ensure that the

necessary corrective measures are implemented

without delay.

A. The interim stay previously operating on the

National Green Tribunal’s final order dated 25

th

February, 2022 shall stand modified, clarified

and lifted, save and except in respect of (i) the

remarks made against RIICO and other

authorities/Corporations, and (ii) the direction

imposing environmental compensation of Rs. 2

Crores upon them.

B. The substantive remedial, regulatory and

preventive directions contained in the National

Green Tribunal’s order dated 25

th February,

2022 shall now be implemented in full, without

impediment.

63

C. The High-Level Ecosystem Oversight Committee

constituted as stated hereinabove shall

commence its functioning at the earliest.

D. The Committee shall prepare a comprehensive,

time-bound River Restoration and Rejuvenation

Blueprint for the entire river system that

includes Rivers Jojari, Luni and Bandi and

ensure its phased implementation.

E. The Committee shall undertake a

comprehensive mapping of all legal and illegal

discharge points into the Jojari, Bandi and Luni

rivers and shall place before this Court its

recommendations and findings in that regard by

way of interim reports/detailed final reports.

F. The Committee shall conduct recurring audits

of all treatment and monitoring infrastructure

at intervals not exceeding three months and

shall provide recommendations specifying

64

compliance benchmarks and remedial

measures required. The concerned authorities

shall ensure strict adherence to such

recommendations.

G. All plans, audits, technical assessments, short-

term and long-term strategies prepared by IIT

Jodhpur, MNIT Jaipur, MBM Engineering

College Jodhpur, BITS Pilani, or any other

institution engaged by the State of Rajasthan,

shall be submitted directly to the High-Level

Ecosystem Oversight Committee.

H. All performance audits of CETPs, STPs,

oxidation ponds, conveyance pipelines, and

industrial primary treatment facilities shall be

submitted before the Committee. The concerned

authorities shall implement the directions

issued by the Committee on the basis of such

audits without delay.

65

I. All State authorities, including RIICO, RSPCB,

municipal bodies, local bodies, and district

administrations as well as the industrial units

individually and the industrial associations,

shall extend full cooperation and support to the

Committee. Any failure to do so shall invite

action, including personal accountability before

this Court.

J. The High-Level Ecosystem Oversight Committee

shall submit its first status report to this Court

within eight weeks from today and thereafter

every eight weeks until further orders.

28. The directions issued hereinabove are not

merely administrative but arise from the

constitutional duty of this Court to safeguard the

fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India, which has been consistently

interpreted to include the right to clean water,

66

unpolluted air, a healthy environment and conditions

conducive to human dignity. The continuing

contamination of the river system and the adjoining

areas, poses a direct and serious threat to these

constitutionally protected rights of millions of

residents in the region. It is therefore imperative that

the remedial framework devised by the National

Green Tribunal, strengthened by the oversight

mechanism established through this judgment, is

implemented with urgency, fidelity and resolve. The

State and all concerned authorities shall act with the

seriousness that the constitutional guarantee of life

and health demands, ensuring that the

environmental integrity of the region is restored and

protected for present and future generations.

29. The learned Additional Advocate General for the

State of Rajasthan shall communicate the copy of

this order to all the concerned

67

authorities/Corporations. The Registry shall also

communicate the copy of this order to the Hon’ble Mr.

Justice Sangeet Lodha, Hon’ble (Retd.) Judge of High

Court of Judicature for Rajasthan on his email

address: j.sangeetlodha@gmail.com.

30. List on 27

th February, 2026 for receiving the

first status report of the High-Level Oversight

Committee.

….……………………J.

(VIKRAM NATH)

...…………………….J.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)

NEW DELHI;

NOVEMBER 21, 2025.