S.No.01


      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU

                                                      WP(C) No.4531/2019
                                                      CM No. 9597/2019


M/s Choudhary Poulty Farm                                      ...Petitioner(s)


                            Through:- Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate

                   V/s
Union of India and others                                    ...Respondent(s)


                            Through:- Mr. Aijaz Lone, Dy. AG

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

                                 ORDER

1. Impugned in this petition is order No.97-PCB of 2019 dated 28.11.2019, whereby J&K Pollution Control Board in exercise of powers under Section 31 (A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has directed the District Magistrate, Samba to get the Poultry Farm of the petitioner closed immediately and has further directed the Chief Engineer, Electric & Maintenance (PDD) to snap the electric supply to the aforesaid unit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the impugned order primarily on two counts, one that with the promulgation of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019, the erstwhile State of J&K has become Union Territory and , therefore, by operation of Section 6 of the Act, the State Pollution Control Board has ceased to have jurisdiction over the matter and the action, if any, required to be taken under the Act, can be validly taken by 2 WP(C) No.4531/2019 the Central Board only. He further submits that the poultry unit does not fall within the expression "plant" as used in Section 21 of the Act.

3. Apart from elaborating his submissions on aforesaid two aspects, learned counsel for the petitioner also sought indulgence of this Court to consider taking some measure of protection with regard to the live stock (poultry) on equitable consideration.

4. Mr. Lone, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has vehemently opposed the writ petition and submits that the State Pollution Control Board has all the jurisdiction to issue impugned order. He relied upon Clause 17 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019.

5. Having heard learned counsel of the parties and perused the record, I am of the view that so far as challenge to the impugned order is concerned, same does not have any substance and, therefore, merits rejection. The poultry unit is a plant as defined under Section 21 of the Act, therefore, cannot operate unless, there is consent to establish and operate granted by the State Pollution Control Board.

6. The plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner that with the coming into force of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019, the State Pollution Control Board has ceased to have jurisdiction is also not tenable in view of issuance of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019 by the Government of India. However, I am inclined to accept the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners for providing some measures of protection so far as live stock in the poultry farm is concerned purely on equitable considerations.

7. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:-

i) The Chief Engineer, Electric and Maintenance (PDD), Jammu shall restore electric supply to the petitioner-unit within two days from the date copy of this order is served upon him.

ii) The electricity shall be supplied to the petitioner-unit only for a period of three months from today.

iii) The petitioner shall during the aforesaid period shall not add any new stock to its poultry farm.

iv) The aforesaid directions are subject to petitioner's furnishing an undertaking to this Court that after expiry of the period of three months, he will close the unit on its own, unless he gets no objection from the Pollution Control Board (consent to establish and to operate) and fulfils other requisite legal requirements.

v) In case, the petitioner does not abide by the undertaking given by him to this Court, besides that he will be liable to be proceeded against for contempt of this Court, the respondents shall also be at liberty to forcibly close the petitioner-unit.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Jammu.

31.12.2019 Vinod.

Whether the order is speaking :Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No SANJEEV KUMAR UPPAL 2020.01.03 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document