NGT issues show cause notice to CPCB for delay in report on use of chemical on natural water bodies

The bench comprising judicial member justice Dinesh Kumar Singh and expert member Sujit Kumar Bajpayee noted that the principal bench had disposed of the matter on April 5, 2024, directing the CPCB to ascertain the feasibility of using Draynzyme on water hyacinth and natural water bodies

The western zonal bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has issued show-cause notice to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) for failing to comply with its earlier directive to submit a report on the feasibility of using chemical Draynzyme on water hyacinth and natural water bodies. The order was passed during a hearing held on January 30, 2026. The case originated from a news report titled, ‘No permission provided for use of chemicals in cleaning water bodies: MPCB’ published in Hindustan Times on February 23, 2024.

The CPCB was required to submit its report to the registrar of the western zonal bench within four months. (HT)

The bench comprising judicial member justice Dinesh Kumar Singh and expert member Sujit Kumar Bajpayee noted that the principal bench had disposed of the matter on April 5, 2024, directing the CPCB to ascertain the feasibility of using Draynzyme on water hyacinth and natural water bodies. The CPCB was required to submit its report to the registrar of the western zonal bench within four months. However, a report submitted by the registrar on January 30, 2026, revealed that the CPCB had failed to file any response within the stipulated period. Taking note of the non-compliance, the tribunal directed the registry to issue show-cause notice to the CPCB, and that the matter be treated as an execution application for enforcement of the April 5, 2024 order.

Appearing for the CPCB, advocate Aniruddha Kulkarni informed the tribunal that a status report had been submitted via email on January 29, 2026, which was taken on record. Upon perusal, the tribunal observed that the CPCB had sought certain information from the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) for further examination. However, counsel for the PMC, Rahul Garg, submitted that the civic body had no role in providing the information sought and stated that such details could only be obtained from suppliers of the said chemical. The tribunal then directed the PMC to file an affidavit placing these submissions on record, with an advance copy to be served to the CPCB. The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB), represented by advocate Pooja Natu holding brief for advocate Manasi Joshi, informed the bench that it did not wish to file any reply at this stage.

The tribunal has listed the matter for further consideration on April 9, 2026. The case stems from concerns over the use of chemicals for clearing water hyacinth from water bodies. Earlier, the MPCB had reported that the use of Glyphosate was restricted due to health hazards and risk to humans, and that it had communicated this restriction to the PMC in June 2023. The PMC admitted to spraying Draynzyme on a trial basis over a 40 square foot stagnant water pool along the Ramnadi, but assured the tribunal that no further use would be undertaken without clearance from a competent authority. In its April 2024 order, the NGT had emphasised that the permissibility of spraying Draynzyme must first be examined by the CPCB in coordination with the Indian Toxicology Research Centre (ITRC), Lucknow, to ensure that it does not have an adverse impact on aquatic ecology. Only thereafter could use of the chemical be considered in accordance with the law.

.