Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 1 docs
THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981

advertisement
User Queries

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.

Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Essen Forge Private Limited vs Punjab Pollution Control Board ... on 13 August, 2009
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                       CWP No. 12266 of 2009

                                       Date of Decision: 13.08.2009



M/s Essen Forge Private Limited.                          ..Petitioner


                         Versus


Punjab Pollution Control Board and others.               ..Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA


Present :    Mr. A.K.Jain, Advocate for the petitioner

                               *****

T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) Pursuant to an order passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 2796 of 2007 dated 04.10.2008, the Punjab Pollution Control Board appears to have initiated action against among others the forging Units established by the petitioner-company on Gill Road opposite P.S.E.B. Office, Ludhiana.

The petitioner's grievance now is that without passing any formal order in the said proceedings, the Board Authorities are bent upon closing the petitioner's unit thereby depriving the petitioner- company of the opportunity to challenge the validity of the order in appropriate proceedings and also carry on its normal business activities.

Mr. Patwalia, learned counsel appearing for the Punjab Pollution Control Board submits that according to his instructions, a CWP No. 12266 of 2009 [2] formal order on the subject has already been passed by the Chairman of the Board about which a statement was made even in the contempt proceedings initiated by Shri Sher Singh (petitioner) in Civil Writ Petition No. 2796 of 2007. He urged that the order in question may have been already served upon the petitioner-company but in case the same has not been served, an additional copy of the order would be served upon the petitioner-company within next two days.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-company may be given reasonable time to challenge the validity of the order in appropriate proceedings before the appropriate Forum and the petitioner-company may be protected against the implementation of the directions issued by the Board in the meantime to prevent any miscarriage of justice.

In the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the limited prayer that has been urged before us, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:-

i) The respondent-Board shall serve the formal order passed under the provisions of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 upon the petitioner- company within one week from today. In case the order has already been served according to the record of the respondent-Board, an additional copy of the same shall be served upon the company within next two days.
ii) In case, the order passed by the respondent-Board has not already been implemented and the Hammer, which is said to be a source of the noise pollution, not already CWP No. 12266 of 2009 [3] sealed as pointed out by Mr. Patwalia, the sealing of the said Hammer and other noise polluting activities in the unit shall remain stayed but only for a limited period of three weeks' from today.

Petition is disposed off with the above observations. No costs.

A copy of the order shall be given dasti to Mr. D.S.Patwalia, for compliance under the signature of the Bench Secretary.

(T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 13.08.2009 'ravinder'