New Delhi: The National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, has registered an application on a suo motu basis based on a news report concerning the drowning of a software engineer, Yuvraj Mehta, in a waterlogged trench at a commercial site in Sector 150, Noida. The Bench held that the incident prima facie indicates non-compliance with environmental norms and a violation of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
The Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Chairperson, and Hon’ble Dr A. Senthil Vel, Expert Member, observed that the matter reveals lapses on the part of the Noida Authority in taking remedial measures, which ultimately resulted in the death.
The Tribunal registered Original Application No. 52/2026 on the basis of the news item titled “Noida CEO Removed; CM Orders SIT Probe into Techie’s Drowning”, published in The Times of India dated 20.01.2026. The Bench noted, “This original application is registered suo motu on the basis of the news item related to the incident.”
Addressing the factual background, the Tribunal observed, “The news item relates to the drowning of a software engineer, Sh. Yuvraj Mehta, in a waterlogged trench at a commercial site in Sector 150, Noida. As per the news item, Sh. Mehta took a sharp right-angle turn and, due to foggy conditions, fell into the trench.”
The Bench highlighted the underlying cause of the waterlogging, stating, “The land in Sector 150 where the incident occurred was initially allotted for a private mall project but had turned into a pond, as rainwater and wastewater discharged from nearby housing societies were allowed to accumulate there for over a decade.”
Regarding administrative failure, the Tribunal noted, “The stormwater management plan prepared by the Irrigation Department in 2015 remained only on paper, despite multiple rounds of surveys and site inspections.”
Detailing the timeline of bureaucratic delays, the Bench observed, “The documents assessed show that in 2015, the Irrigation Department proposed the construction of a head regulator to divert water flow into the Hindon River. In 2016, it received ₹13.05 lakh from the Noida Authority to conduct a survey and prepare a design for the proposed regulator.”
Addressing ignored technical recommendations, the Tribunal stated, “As per the news item, the stormwater received from existing drains had the potential to increase discharge, and it was suggested that hydraulic or pneumatic gates be used instead of mechanical ones.”
Emphasising the consequences of administrative inaction, the Bench noted, “The delay in undertaking remedial measures resulted in severe waterlogging. The basements of several nearby housing societies were flooded, as rainwater could not be discharged into the Hindon River in the absence of a regulator.”
On the environmental impact, the Tribunal observed, “In the absence of a controlled outlet, water stagnated and posed the risk of backflow into the swollen river. Residents alleged continued inaction by the Noida Authority despite persistent waterlogging.”
In its critical finding, the Bench stated, “The news item indicates lapses on the part of the Noida Authority in taking remedial measures, which resulted in the death of the individual.”
On the legal implications, the Tribunal held, “The matter indicates a violation of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.”
The Bench further observed, “The news item raises substantial issues relating to compliance with environmental norms and the implementation of provisions under the scheduled enactments.”
Regarding its jurisdiction to take suo motu cognisance, the Tribunal noted, “The power of the Tribunal to take up matters suo motu has been recognised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha & Ors., reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 897.”
The Tribunal impleaded five respondents, including the Noida Authority, Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Irrigation Department (Government of Uttar Pradesh), Principal Secretary (Environment, Government of Uttar Pradesh), and the District Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar.
By way of procedural directions, the Bench ordered, “Issue notice to the above respondents to file their responses/replies by way of affidavit at least one week prior to the next date of hearing.”
The matter has been listed for hearing on 10.04.2026.
Case Title:
News Item titled “Noida CEO Removed; CM Orders SIT Probe into Techie’s Drowning” published in The Times of India dated 20.01.2026
![NGT seeks response on Artificial Light Pollution’s impact on environment and health [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2024/12/lj_2102_NGT_Probes_Artificial_Light_Pollution’s_Impact_on_Health_and_Environment.jpg)
![Supreme Court questions NGT’s power to direct PMLA prosecution in Pollution Case [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2025/01/lj_1504_Supreme_Court_questions_NGT’s.webp)
