World Saviours Vs. Union of India and Others
EmailAppeal: Writ Petition (C) No. 320 of 1994
Petitioner: World Saviours
Respondent: Union of India and Others
Apeal: Writ Petition (C) No. 320 of 1994
Judges: A.M. AHMADI, C.J., SUJATA V. MANOHAR & G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jan 20, 1997
Head Note:
ENVIRONMENT
Constitution
Article 32 – Pollution Control – Recommendations of Expert Com-mittee that Electricity Board should not given connection with out NOC from PCB. Held, was necessary. Industries which are not involving pollution allowed to carry activities, subject to decision of PCB on merits. (Para 3)
Constitution
Article 32 – Pollution Control – Recommendations of Expert Com-mittee that Electricity Board should not given connection with out NOC from PCB. Held, was necessary. Industries which are not involving pollution allowed to carry activities, subject to decision of PCB on merits. (Para 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. After the order was passed on 6-12-1996, the only industry left was at Serial No. 90 M/s Dugdh Utpadhan Sahkari Sangh, but in relation to that the Pollution Control Board itself has not granted the permission for the new boilers and, therefore, the question of this Court passing orders in that behalf does not arise.
2. Our attention was next drawn to the recommendations made by the Expert Committee in its Report at p. 82. The recommendation which was pressed was the one in relation to the State Electrici-ty Board. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out the fact noted in the paragraph just preceding the recommendations in which it is stated that power supplied to industrial units in the Doon Valley is provided on the basis of No Objection Certificate from the State Pollution Control Board. However, in eight cases, electricity supply had been augmented by the State Electricity Board without the project authorities having obtained the NOC from the Pollution Control Board, thereby permitting expansion of the production capacities and consequently pollution potential of these units. The recommendation is that the State Electricity Board should also be asked to ensure that permission for elec-tricity connection/augmentation is not given to the industries without NOC from the State Pollution Control Board. We think that this recommendation is essential to ensure that the pollution potential of the units does not increase by expansion without NOC from the Pollution Control Board. The learned counsel for the Central Government states that they would abide by this direc-tion. We direct that this direction should be scrupulously fol-lowed.
3. On the last occasion, we directed the closure of the dis-tillery, M/s Doon Valley Distillers as it had failed to meet the minimum requirements and was found to be polluting by the dis-charge of effluents. We are now told that certain industries which were similarly ordered to be closed down were permitted to do the bottling work which did not discharge any effluents. We see no reason to make any specific order except to say that if the industry desires to carry on any activity which does not involve pollution and approaches the State Pollution Control Board,the Board will examine the proposal on its own merits. Secondly, if the industry is able to show to the Board that it has now made arrangements to ensure that there is no pollution and the Board is satisfied about the same, the Board will take a decision on merits on the request made by the industry. Unless the Board is fully satisfied that the industry will not be pol-luting by discharge of effluents, the Board will not give the permission.
4. Nothing further survives in this petition. The petition is, therefore, finally closed and disposed of with no order as to costs.
1. After the order was passed on 6-12-1996, the only industry left was at Serial No. 90 M/s Dugdh Utpadhan Sahkari Sangh, but in relation to that the Pollution Control Board itself has not granted the permission for the new boilers and, therefore, the question of this Court passing orders in that behalf does not arise.
2. Our attention was next drawn to the recommendations made by the Expert Committee in its Report at p. 82. The recommendation which was pressed was the one in relation to the State Electrici-ty Board. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out the fact noted in the paragraph just preceding the recommendations in which it is stated that power supplied to industrial units in the Doon Valley is provided on the basis of No Objection Certificate from the State Pollution Control Board. However, in eight cases, electricity supply had been augmented by the State Electricity Board without the project authorities having obtained the NOC from the Pollution Control Board, thereby permitting expansion of the production capacities and consequently pollution potential of these units. The recommendation is that the State Electricity Board should also be asked to ensure that permission for elec-tricity connection/augmentation is not given to the industries without NOC from the State Pollution Control Board. We think that this recommendation is essential to ensure that the pollution potential of the units does not increase by expansion without NOC from the Pollution Control Board. The learned counsel for the Central Government states that they would abide by this direc-tion. We direct that this direction should be scrupulously fol-lowed.
3. On the last occasion, we directed the closure of the dis-tillery, M/s Doon Valley Distillers as it had failed to meet the minimum requirements and was found to be polluting by the dis-charge of effluents. We are now told that certain industries which were similarly ordered to be closed down were permitted to do the bottling work which did not discharge any effluents. We see no reason to make any specific order except to say that if the industry desires to carry on any activity which does not involve pollution and approaches the State Pollution Control Board,the Board will examine the proposal on its own merits. Secondly, if the industry is able to show to the Board that it has now made arrangements to ensure that there is no pollution and the Board is satisfied about the same, the Board will take a decision on merits on the request made by the industry. Unless the Board is fully satisfied that the industry will not be pol-luting by discharge of effluents, the Board will not give the permission.
4. Nothing further survives in this petition. The petition is, therefore, finally closed and disposed of with no order as to costs.
