Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010171482018




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C) 5435/2018

         1:PRAKASH SWAMI
         S/O- SRI SAGARMAL SWAMI, VILL AND P.O- URIAMGHAT, DIST-
         GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785601 AND PROP OF M/S- DOYANG STONE
         CRUSHING INDUSTRIES HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AND OFFICE AT
         VILL NO.2, RAJAPUKHURI, P.O- SARUPATHAR, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM,
         PIN- 785601

         VERSUS

         1:THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND 3 ORS
         ASSAM, REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
         BAMUNIMAIDAM, GHY

         2:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          REGIONAL OFFICE
          GOLAGHAT
          PCB
         ASSAM COLLEGE TINIALI
          NEAR CIRCUIT HOUSE
          GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM


         3:SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL)
          DHANSIRI SARUPATHAR
          DIST- GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM


         4:DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
          GOLAGHAT DIVISION
          GOLAGHAT
          DIST- GOLAGHAT
         ASSA
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/3


Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR C BARUAH

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PCB




                                    BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                                           ORDER

Date : 15-05-2019 Heard Mr. RK Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. PJ Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Pollution Control Board, Assam for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Also heard Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Government Advocate, Assam for respondent No.3 and Ms. P Choudhury, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents, more particularly respondent No.2 i.e., Executive Engineer, Golaghat Regional Office, Pollution Control Board, Assam to issue consent to operate in favour of M/S Doyang Stone Crushing Industries owned by the petitioner.

Petitioner is the proprietorship of M/S Doyang Stone Crushing Industries, which is registered with the District Industries Centre, Golaghat as well as with the Chief Inspector of Factories, Assam. Respondent No.2 had issued consent to operate to M/S Doyang Stone Crushing Industries (petitioner's unit) under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 on 02.08.2016 for the period up-to 31.03.2017, which was thereafter extended up-to 31.03.2018. It is alleged that some people had lodged complaint alleging that petitioner's unit was causing noise and air pollution. Acting on such public complaint, Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Dhansiri, Sarupathar had suspended operation of the petitioner's unit vide order dated 08.08.2017. Subsequently, vide order dated 03.03.2018, such suspension of operation was withdrawn. In the process, the period up-to 31.03.2018 expired. Petitioner applied afresh for consent to operate under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. Since no decision was taken, petitioner submitted representation before respondent No.2 on 25.06.2018. As there was no response, present writ petition came to be filed.

Notice in this case was issued on 30.08.2018.

Page No.# 3/3 Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in their common affidavit have taken the stand that Pollution Control Board had carried out air quality monitoring as well as noise level monitoring of the petitioner's unit and found the same to be beyond permissible limit. However, Member Secretary of Pollution Control Board had written to the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat on 01.11.2018 to constitute a committee having representatives of different departments and to examine the complaint whereafter report was to be submitted.

Mr. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel submits that till date, no report has been received from the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, Court is of the view that power to grant consent to operate is specifically vested in the Pollution Control Board. This power is to be exercised by the Pollution Control Board.

In such circumstances, it is for the Pollution Control Board and its authorities to take a decision one way or the other regarding prayer of the petitioner to grant consent to operate for the year 2018-19 and beyond.

Let such decision be taken by respondent Nos.1 and 2 within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If consent to operate is granted to the petitioner, it should be ensured that petitioner's unit conforms to permissible air quality and noise level parameters.

This disposes of the writ petition.

JUDGE Biplab Comparing Assistant