Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

T.S. Saji Mon, Managing Partner Vs. Thiruvanvandoor Grama Panchayat, Secretary, Thiruvanvandoor Grama and Kerala Pollution Control Board.

Country/Territory
India
Type of court
National - higher court
Date
Jan 4, 2010
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
High Court of Kerala
Seat of court
Ernakulam
Judge
Antony Dominic.
Language
English
Subject
Air & atmosphere
Keyword
Air pollution (stationary sources)
Abstract
The petitioner is a partnership firm, which owns a crumb rubber factory situated within the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent Panchayat. The licence granted by the Panchayat under the Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories Rules, was valid till 31/03/2008 and the consent issued by the Pollution Control Board, is valid till 30/06/2012. A notice issued by the 2nd respondent on 11/11/2009 requiried the petitioner to stop functioning of the unit. It is stated that although the Panchayat was required to consider the application made by the petitioner for renewal of the licence, it was without complying with the said direction that the notice was issued to the petitioner. The Kerala Pollution Control Board has inspected the premises and filed two reports. From these reports, it is evident that the directions of the Pollution Control Board, in so far as shifting of the packed system in the chimney for scrubbing to the scrubber unit, enhancing the efficiency of alkali scrubbing provided in the chimney, and increasing of the draft in the chimney by providing adequate fans to avoid fugitive emission from the scrubbing unit are still not complied with. The petitioner submits that while taking steps for the expeditious compliance with the aforesaid requirements of the Pollution Control Board and that pending such rectification, the Unit should be allowed to resume its operations. This prayer of the petitioner is vehemently opposed by the respondents, claimimg that if the unit resumes manufacturing without complying with the directions of the Pollution Control Board, there will be environmental pollution, and the life in the area will be miserable. In the light of the fact that the complaint of the additional 4th respondent is one of environmental pollution resulting in violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Court do not think appropriate to direct resumption of activities in the petitioner's industrial establishment. Therefore, the only order which is called for is that it will be open to the petitioner to comply with the directions of the Pollution Control Board as contained at serial Nos. (c), (d) & (e) of the reports filed before this Court, and thereafter seek restoration of the licence from the Panchayat, which has passed the resolution rejecting the petitioner's application only for reasons of environmental pollution. It is directed that if the petitioner files certificate issued by the Chief Environmental Engineer of the Board that the Unit has complied with all directions issued by the Board, the Panchayat shall reconsider the application made by the petitioner for renewal / extension of Ext.P1 licence and pass fresh orders in the light of the certificate so produced. It is further directed that if the Pollution Control Board certifies satisfaction of the conditions imposed by it, and the petitioner produces a certificate to that effect before the Panchayat, along with necessary application for renewal / extension of the licence, the petitioner will be free to resume manufacturing activities in its industrial unit from that date onwards. On receipt of the certificate and application from the petitioner, the Panchayat should consider the matter afresh, and pass orders in the matter within seven days thereafter, and the further operation of the petitioner's industrial unit will depend upon the decision to be taken by the Panchayat.
Full text
COU-156213.pdf
Website
www.indiankanoon.org