Order

An additional affidavit of Undertaking has been filed in Court today by Mr. P Natarajan on behalf of the Industry, respondent No. 6.

We have heard learned counsel for respondent No. 6, the learned Amicus Curiae as also the learned counsel appearing for Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.

From a perusal of the affidavit filed by the Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board on 12.1.1998, it transpires that certain directions were issued by the Board in exercise of the powers con­ferred under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, as amended in 1988 to respondent No. 6. These directions were inter alia aimed at ensuring proper storage of efflu­ent in lagoons and for proper treatment and disposal of the treated effluent. As many as 11 directions, as detailed in the affidavit, were given. Para 5 of the said affidavit discloses that the Industry (respondent No. 6) has not complied with direction Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9. It is also stated that during the inspection of the Industry on 23rd of November, 1997, it was noticed that the seepage of effluent from lagoon ‘C’ joined the drain and ultimately reached river Bhavani thereby contravening the conditions imposed in the directions by the Board. The affidavit goes on to say that show cause notice was also issued by the Board to the Industry calling upon it to state why penal action for offences punishable under Section 44 read with Section 45(a) of the Act should not be initiated for violating the conditions imposed by the Board.

Respondent No. 6 in its affidavit filed on 27th of January, 1998 has not denied that 11 directions had been issued to it by the Board and that some of those directions have not been complied with. It is stated in para (d) as follows :

“In respect of the direction of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board at Para (viii) that the Company shall give progress report on disposal of accumulated effluent in lagoons every fortnight and also fortnight­ly progress report on the actions taken to comply with the conditions stipulated in the Consent Order issued by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, it is submitted that the Company has furnished daily statements giving complete particulars of the effluent generated, effluent utilised for composting and for concentration; inflow into lagoons, outflow from the lagoons and other detailed particulars. The receipt of these daily statements by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board is acknowledge in their Affidavit filed before this Honourable Court. Apart from the daily statements, the Company has also furnished consolidated and fortnightly reports to the Joint Chief Environmental Engineer of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.”

In the affidavit of Undertaking filed on behalf of respondent No. 6 today it is stated that since 16th of January, 1998, the production capacity of the Industry has been reduced and ferti-irrigation has been completely stopped. It is also stated that the entire effluent is being utilised within the premises for bio-composting and that there is no discharge of water or effluent on land or in water.

With regard to the two unlined lagoons, it is stated in para 7(a) of the affidavit of undertaking filed today that effluent has been stored in the two unlined lagoons and it is reiterated that no further dis­charge of effluent is being made into the unlined lagoons.

As already noticed, according to the Board, the seepage from the unlined lagoons to which effluent has been stored joins the drain and ultimately reaches river Bhavani thereby polluting the river water. This is a serious matter and shows that pollution is continuing be­cause of actions of respondent No. 6 and remedial steps have not been taken to prevent pollution and contamination of the river water. Respondent No. 6, has obviously failed to arrest the unabated pollu­tion, which has become a health hazard and environmental enemy. Enough time has been given to the Industry (respondent No. 6) to take