Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision: October 19, 2011
Sukhdev Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: Mr. Harpreet S. Rakhra, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. AG, Punjab,
for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
Ms. Manisha Gandhi, Advocate,
for respondent No. 4.
Mr. Rajesh Garg, Advocate,
for respondent No. 5.
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? YES
2. Whether the judgment should be
reported in the Digest?
M.M. KUMAR, Acting
Acting C.J.
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks a direction to the official respondents for taking effective steps with regard to expansion of Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4 and for its re-allocation to some other alternative site. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that the said industrial unit has come within the residential area, is a source of noise and air pollution and also creating hurdle for the residents of the area.
CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 2
2. Brief facts of the case are that Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4 was set up in the year 1977. At that point of time it was located far away from the township of Rampura Phul, District Bathinda. However, with the growth of population several residential colonies like Jawahar Nagar have developed in an around the area where the respondent No. 4 industry is located. It is pertinent to mention that the said industry manufactures 'Cold Rolled Steel Strips'. According to the petitioner, when the industry was set up the area was not inhabited and there was no danger to the human beings. But now the position has changed. Several residential houses have come up in the vicinity of the industrial unit. The industry is also expanding. The petitioner has placed on record a representation made by the Gram Panchayat of Jawahar Nagar, dated 10.10.2008, requesting the Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda, to interfere in the matter of expansion of Stelco Industries-respondent No. 4 (P-1). It has been stated that the industry is a source of noise pollution day and night and the persons living in the residential area are facing several problems. The petitioner also served a legal notice dated 23.10.2008 (P-2) in this regard.
3. Even the Gram Panchayat and the residents of Jawahar Nagar instituted proceedings under Section 133 IPC in the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rampura Phul, against M/s Stelco Industries-respondent No. 4. However, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rampura Phul, found no truth in the complaint and dismissed the same, vide order dated 23.10.2009 (P-3). It has been specifically observed by the SDM that other factories are also CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 3 located near Stelco Industries and, in fact, it is a private dispute. The factory has got the pollution certificate from the Pollution Control Board.
4. The petitioner has also alleged that the Pollution Control Board has granted No Objection Certificate to the respondent No. 4 industry without ascertaining the true facts. Even it has not obtained the requisite permission for Change of Land Use (CLU) from the Department of Town and Country Planning before applying the clearance certificate and various consents under the statutes dealing with Air and Water pollution. It does not conform to the terms and conditions imposed for establishment of new industries and enlargement of old industries, which have been placed on record (P-4). According to the petitioner, Stelco Industries- respondent No. 4 is undergoing expansion by forcibly taking the lands of small farmers or whose land adjoins the existing factory, therefore, effective steps are required to be initiated for its re- allocation.
5. On 25.3.2011, a detailed written statement was filed on behalf of the Punjab Pollution Control Board-respondent No. 5 (for brevity, 'the Board'). In the preliminary submissions it has been asserted that on 6.10.1995, Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 was granted No Objection Certificate for the establishment of an industrial plan for production of 10 TPD of Cold Rolled Steel Trips (R-5/A). It was also granted consents to operate under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (for brevity, 'Water Act' and 'Air Act' respectively), which were valid up CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 4 to 31.5.2011. Various documents have also been placed on record showing that the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 conforms to the standards laid down by the Board. It has further been pointed out that on receipt of a complaint from the residents of the area, a show cause notice dated 15.9.2009 was issued to Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4. On 30.9.2009, after granting personal hearing to the Director of respondent No. 4, the Board took the following decisions:
"i) The Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, Bathinda be requested to put seals on the machinery of the acid pickling section as the same is not being operated by the industry, so as to ensure that the industry shall not use unauthorised mode of disposal for the wastewater to be generated from the said section due to off and on operation of the same.
ii) The industry will obtain permission from the Bard before it intends to operate the acid pickling section.
iii) The industry shall submit an affidavit to the effect that it shall not carry out any expansion of the existing industrial plant and shall not carry any industrial activities in the shed measuring as 55' x 400' without the prior permission of the Board, within 7 days.
iv) The industry shall submit a certificate issued by DTP, Bathinda showing the land use of the area in CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 5 which the industrial plant is located, within 10 days.
v) The Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, Bathinda shall carry out emission sampling of all the stacks immediately and send report/recommendations within 2 weeks.
vi) The industry shall either provide proper canopy with the DG set of 800 KVA or provide acoustic liner inside the closed type room in which the said DG set has been installed; so as to contain the sound pressure level within the norms fixed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests."
6. In compliance to the above decisions, an affidavit was filed by Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 that no industrial activity would be carried out in the newly constructed shed without the prior written permission of the Board. On 4.11.2009, the Environmental Engineer also reported that the said industry has completely dismantled its cage type acid pickling section. The District Town Planner, Bathinda, was also requested to intimate the land use of the area in which the industry is located. On 10.2.2010, the District Town Planner, Bathinda, informed that Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 is comprised in 45 Kanals and 9 Marlas of land. Some part of it, as per the proposed non-statutory master plan of Rampura Phul, falls under industrial spot zone and some part under residential zone and the remaining falls under proposed road sector.
7. The Board in its written statement further disclosed that on 1.11.2010, Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 has CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 6 applied for obtaining varied consents under the Water Act and Air Act for the production of cold rolled and hard tempered steel strips @ 24,000 MTA (66 TPD). After examining the matter it was felt that the said industry needs 'NOC' from the Board for regularisation of its installed/actual production capacity along with varied consents under the Water Act and Air Act. For this purpose 15 days time was granted to it to proceed further in the matter.
8. On 25.1.2011, the Environmental Engineer of the Board submitted his report to the effect that Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4 has not applied for obtaining 'NOC' from the Board for regularisation of its installed/actual production capacity along with certificate from competent authority regarding the suitability of site and proposal to install proper effluent treatment plant to treat the effluent generated from floor washing and spent cutting oil as well as development of land with plantation for disposal of its trade and domestic effluent in proper manner. Accordingly, the applications of the industry for varied consents under the provisions of the Water Act and Air Act were returned in original vide letter dated 21.12.2010 with the remarks to re-submit the same after attending to the said observations. It has also been found that the industry has increased its power load as well as production capacity without obtaining the prior sanction from the Board. Other than this, on 22.1.2011, the premises of the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 was again inspected by the officers of the Board and following shortcomings were noticed:
"i) The industry was in operation with some of its processes for manufacturing of cold rolled steel CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 7 strips and hard tempered steel strips by using only 1300 KW peak load exemption due to the power restrictions imposed by the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. during the ongoing month. However, the industry has sanctioned power load of 4899.822 KW as per the report of the Assistant Engineer, City Sub-Division, PSPCL, Rampura Phul (900 KW power load has been increased on 06.09.2004 and 1000 KW on 18.08.2006, without the approval of the Board).
ii) The industry was earlier granted consents under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and AIR (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 for 18 TPD production capacity to manufacture cold rolled and hard tempered steel strips. Later on, the industry applied for varied consents for installed capacity of 66 TPD (24,000 TPA) and as such the applications were returned to the industry vide letter No. 4048 dated 21.12.2010. Earlier, the industrial unit was having 5 number old oil fired annealing furnaces of capacity 20 Ton each and have been replaced with 5 no. oil fired annealing furnaces of capacity 40 ton each. One DG set of 800 KVA capacity has been added. The entire expansion in the premises of the industrial unit has been made without the NOC of the Board.
iii) The industry has not started the installation of ETP CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 8 to treat the effluent generated from the washing and spent cutting oil so far.
iv) The industry has developed about 3 Kanals land area with plantation for the discharge of its effluent, however, no provision has been made to take the effluent to the developed land and the same was discharged on to land for irrigation at the time of the inspection."
9. In view of the above violations of the Water Act and Air Act, a show cause notice was issued to Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4. On 25.2.2011, the Director of the said industry appeared before the Member Secretary of the Board and submitted that they would install adequate pollution control devices and also took effective steps for proper disposal of treated effluent on to the land for plantation, within three weeks. He further assured that the industry would also obtain CLU from the Department of Town and Country Planning within three weeks. Keeping in view the above assurances, the Member Secretary of the Board took the following conscious decisions:
"1. The industry shall not operate the machinery installed without NOC of the Board as detailed above without the prior written permission of the Board.
2. The industry shall provide proper and adequate pollution control devices along with proper disposal arrangements for treated effluent onto land for plantation within 3 weeks.CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 9
3. The industry shall get change of land use from the Department of Town and Country Planning within 3 weeks positively.
4. The Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, Bathinda shall visit the industry immediately after 3 weeks and shall submit his report along with recommendations."
10. Despite noticing the above shortcomings and lapses on the part of Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4, still an objection has been raised with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition by the petitioner. Dismissal of the petition has been sought by averring that adequate steps have already been taken by the Board against Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 and in case it fails to comply with the decisions already taken, appropriate further action would be taken against it.
11. A reply by way of affidavit of Additional Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Industries and Commerce, dated 8.7.2011, has also been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, wherein it has been submitted that at the time when the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 and other factories were established there was no residential area in existence. It has been asserted that though there are several factories located in the area but the petitioner has targeted only Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4. Therefore, it seems that there is a private dispute between the petitioner and Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4. The said industry has already got the NOC from the Board. No cause of action to file the instant petition has arisen CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 10 and the same deserves to be dismissed.
12. In the reply filed by Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 at the outset it has been urged that the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner to settle his personal scores. It has been pointed out that the brothers of the petitioner had sold their land to Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 and the petitioner is attempting to extort and compel the company to pay an exorbitant price for sale of the land owned by him. However, it is not interested in the purchase of petitioner's land. Thus, the present petition is a subtle devise and has been filed with a view to settle personal vendetta. It has been disclosed that the industry is being run after obtaining the requisite permissions from the Board and it is not causing any pollution as alleged. Various sanctions from the appropriate authorities have already been obtained. In that regard various varied consents granted by the Board have been placed on record (R-4/1).
13. The Board has also filed a status report by way of affidavit dated 13.7.2011, bringing on record the events which have taken place after filing of its written statement. It has been pointed out that Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 applied for varied consents to operate under the provisions of the Water Act and Air Act and for increased capacity to manufacture cold rolled/hardened tempered steel strips @ 60 TPD along with the requisite documents and CLU for additional land of 24 Kanals 0 Marlas, issued by the Chief Town Planner, Chandigarh, vide Memo. No. 2559, dated 5.4.2011 (R-5/F). On 11.4.2011, the District Town Planner, Bathinda, also informed the Board that as per the site plan CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 11 of Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4, total land area of the industry is 45 Kanals 19 Marlas out of which the CLU for 24 Kanals has already been granted and the remaining 21 Kanals 19 Marlas falls in the industrial spot zone as per the non-statutory master plan of Rampura Phul Town (R-5/G). On 16.4.2011, the industry was again inspected and it was found that it was complying with the provisions of Pollution Control Laws. Accordingly, consents to operate under the Water Act and Air Act have been granted to it uptil 9.11.2011, subject to the terms and conditions mentioned in the sanction (R-5/I). Thereafter, on 22.6.2011 the officers of the Board went to the premises of the industry to collected samples of air emissions and waste water. However, samples of waste water could not be collected because the industry has not generated any effluent from the washing and spent cutting oil processes. The Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) installed by the industry has been found to be in proper condition. The analysis report of the air emission sample collected from the stack of annealing furnace revealed that the pollutants were within the prescribed limits (R-5/J).
14. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the paper book with their able assistance. From a threadbare scrutiny of various documents and factual position placed on record it is evident that a number of shortcomings were noticed by the Board in the functioning of the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 after receipt of complaint from the residents of the area. Acting promptly on the complaint, show cause notices were issued to it and after compliance with the CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 12 principles of natural justice several restrictions were imposed by the Board, which have already been noticed in the preceding paras. The industry was also inspected by the officers of the Board time and again and directions were issued to comply with the norms prescribed by the Water Act and Air Act and other Pollution Control Laws. It has also come on record that the Stelco Industries Limited- respondent No. 4 in compliance with the decisions taken by the Board, have already obtained varied consent under the Water Act and Air Act and also obtained CLU from the District Town Planner. As per the status report dated 13.7.2011, the said industry is found to have completed all the formalities. It has been specifically stated that the air emission are within the prescribed limits. The industry has also installed Effluent Treatment Plant. In nut shell, all the prescribed norms are being complied with by the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4.
15. It needs to be highlighted here that in the recent past, there is a flood of petitions filed in this Court, which are styled as Public Interest Litigation where the petitioner(s) do not disclose their credentials. In such cases it has been found that there is direct or indirect personal motive or interest of the petitioner is always involved. However, when this Court took cognisance of the matter, nothing concrete comes to the surface in most of the cases. It is well settled that under the garb of filing a petition in larger public interest, an individual cannot ventilate his personal grievances, especially without disclosing the same. It is sheer misuse of the process of law. If anyone is affected adversely or individually then the course is open to file a petition without CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 13 invoking the support of Public Interest Litigation. This tendency, thus, needs to be discouraged for launching a litigation which involves private interest. In the present case, the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 has raised a specific objection that the petitioner wants to settle his personal interest by filing the instant petition. The same has not been controverted by the petitioner by filing any additional affidavit or replication. We are of the view that there is substance in the above objection because it has also come on record that there are several other industries also located in the area but the petitioner has chosen to target only the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4. The motive is obvious. As already noticed above, his brothers have already sold their land to Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 and he is attempting to compel the said company to pay an exorbitant price for sale of his land. On the other hand, the Stelco Industries Limited-respondent No. 4 is not interested in purchasing his land.
16. This Court has already framed the Rules, namely, 'Maintainability of Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010' (for brevity, 'the 2010 Rules'). Rule 6 of the 2010 Rules defines the main categories under which a Public Interest Litigation ('PIL') could be entertained. It also includes the petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, forest and wild life. Maintainability of a 'PIL' is governed by Rule 2, which reads thus:
"2. No Public Interest Litigation shall be entertained by the Registry unless the petitioner(s) has specifically disclosed his credentials and his direct or indirect CWP No. 19773 of 2010 (O&M) 14 personal motive or interest involved in the case, if any, by way of an affidavit."
17. From a bare perusal of Rule 2 of the 2010 Rules it is evident that an affidavit is required to be filed by the petitioner filing a writ petition as 'PIL' specifically disclosing his credentials and direct or indirect personal motive or interest involved in the case. However, no such affidavit has been filed by the petitioner in the present case. Accordingly, we find no merit in the instant petition and the same deserves to be dismissed.
18. For the reasons stated above, this petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, the Registry is directed to insist compliance of Rule 2 of the 2010 Rules whenever any petition falling under any of the categories prescribed by Rule 6 of the 2010 Rules is filed in this Court. Necessary steps in that regard be taken by the Registrar Judicial by issuing a circular/notice in the daily cause list for the information of the Members of the Bar and also putting the same on the High Court website.
(M.M. KUMAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA RAINA) INA) October 19 19, 201 2011 JUDGE Pkapoor