Civil Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2009                                     1




      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.


                  Civil Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2009

                      Date of Decision: 22.7.2009


Mahesh Dyeing House
                                                                ...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.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. Whether to be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. S.S. Behl, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. A.R. Takkar, Advocate for the respondents.

T.S. Thakur, C.J. (Oral) In this petition for a writ of mandamus, the petitioner has prayed for directions to the respondents not to use coercive, unreasonable and harsh methods so as to force the petitioner to shift its Dyeing Unit from B-XXIV-1899, Jalandhar Bye-pass Road, Opposite New Shakti Nagar, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana to Plot No. D287, Focal Point, Phase-VIII, Ludhiana. The petitioner also prays for a direction that electric supply to the Unit should not be disconnected, till it is shifted to Civil Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2009 2 the new location.

The material facts are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that the petitioner-Unit is operating at the old location mentioned earlier from where it was supposed to shift and be set up in an Industrial Plot in Phase-VIII, Focal Point, Ludhiana, which plot was allotted to the petitioner on preferential basis. Even after the allotment and the expiry of period of one year granted for shifting of the old Unit, the petitioner did not shift the Unit to its new location. In November 2004, the Board appears to have taken note of the failure of the petitioner and issued a notice under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The Unit was once again visited in September 2005 only to find that the same had not been shifted to Focal Point where the civil works were also incomplete. In December 2005, again the Unit was directed, under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, to shift its operation to its new location. Notices and proceedings held thereafter till the year 2009 have granted to the petitioner further extension of time to shift to the new place but without any worthwhile result. The position even as on date is that the same. continues to operate from its old location where ETP set up by the petitioner was found to be non-functional. That apart the Unit has been working without any "consent to operate" from the Pollution Control Board authorities. It is, in these circumstances, that the Board had written a letter dated 4.5.2009 issuing directions to the Punjab State Electricity Board to disconnect the electric supply. The petitioner has not assailed the said direction. Instead it has filed the present petition in which it has prayed for a mandamus seeking a direction against the Civil Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2009 3 respondents not to use coercive methods for shifting of the Unit from its old to new location.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. We fail to understand how the unit has been running at the old location without a consent to operate from the Pollution Control Board as required under the statute and how can it claim a direction for keeping in abeyance the order passed by the Board directing disconnection of electric supply upon its failure to shift and to set up an ETP at its new location. No mandamus can be issued directing the respondents not to take any steps that must logically follow the orders passed by us especially when such orders are not under challenge in these proceedings. Confronted with this position, Mr. Behl made a statement which has been separately recorded to the effect that the Unit will be shifted to its new location latest by 15.9.2009 and that in case the needful is not done, the Pollution Control Board shall be free to have the electric supply disconnected and to take all other steps necessary to shut down the Unit.

Mr. Takkar, counsel appearing for the Board submits that while this Court could grant the time prayed for, it must be made clear that no extension in the said period shall be granted and the Board and the Punjab State Electricity Board shall be free to disconnect the electric supply if the Unit is not shifted to its new location by 15.9.2009.

In the circumstances, therefore, we are inclined to grant to the petitioner the concession prayed for by Mr. Behl. We, accordingly, direct that the directions issued by the Board for disconnection of electric supply by the Punjab State Electricity Board at its old location shall not Civil Writ Petition No. 6990 of 2009 4 be enforced and shall remain suspended till 15.9.2009. In case the petitioner does not shift the Unit or voluntarily shut down the same, the Board shall be free not only to disconnect the supply of energy but also take other steps necessary and permissible in law to stop its operation.

The writ petition is, with the above observations, disposed off leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

(T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge July 22, 2009 "DK"