Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Gunavathi Proprietrix of Decorticating Unit Vs. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and The Joint Chief Environmental Engineer Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.

País/Territorio
India
Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
Sep 26, 2006
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
High Court of Madras
Sede de la corte
Madras
Juez
Shah, A.P.
Chandru, K.
Idioma
Inglés
Materia
Aire y atmósfera
Palabra clave
Calidad del aire/contaminación del aire Contaminación del aire (fuentes fijas)
Resumen
The petitioner is the Proprietrix of Decorticating Unit registered as a Small Scale Industry and the Government of Tamil Nadu vide order dated 30.11.1989 issued a Permanent Registration Certificate for the purpose of manufacturing Groundnut Kernels and also processing of raw rice flour for "Murukku. It challenges the order of the first respondent / Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board dated 02.8.2006 wherein and by which the first respondent, by exercising his power under Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, issued direction to the closure of the petitioner's unit and also stoppage of electricity with immediate effect and this order is impugned in this writ petition. Inspection of the petitioner's unit was conducted on 23.3.2006 and the petitioner had not provided proper Air Pollution Control measures and the consent of the Board was also not obtained and also there are frequent complaints from the public against the dust pollution caused by the unit. It is admitted that the report of the inspection conducted on 23.3.2006 was not given to the petitioner and no show cause notice was issued before taking any action. In terms of Sections 25 and 26 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. In these proceedings, the small industries employing less than 20, which are listed out in the annexure to the order, have been exempted from the purview of the Pollution Act. Even in the exemption order, it is stated that only if there is any objection from the surrounding Community and after verification, the facility given to the industry can be withdrawn. That is not the case in the present circumstances. In the light of the above, the impugned order is set aside. The respondents are directed to inform the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to restore the power connection to the petitioner's unit forthwith, if not already done. It is open to the first respondent to issue show cause notice to the petitioner in terms of law after taking into account the exemption granted to the industries in one of which the petitioner is carrying on business and after getting explanation from the petitioner and after affording opportunity to the petitioner, an order may be passed by the first respondent Board and the same may be communicated to the petitioner. If the order is adverse to the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect to, for a period of two weeks from the date of order.
Texto completo
COU-156023.pdf
Página web
www.indiankanoon.org