Supreme Court Of India
Decided On : (January 29, 1998)
BHAVANI RIVER SAKTHI SUGARS
Versus
TAMIL NADU Pollution Control Board
WATER (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1974 - SECTION 33-A - DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD - NON-COMPLIANCE - CLOSURE OF INDUSTRY - DIRECTIONS TO NEERI FOR INSPECTION AND REPORT.
Fact of the Case:
The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board issued directions to an industry under Section 33-A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, to ensure proper storage and treatment of effluent. The industry failed to comply with some of the directions, resulting in pollution of a river.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the industry had not complied with the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board and that pollution was continuing due to the actions of the industry. The court also found that the industry had failed to take remedial steps to prevent pollution and contamination of the river water.
Issues: Whether the industry had complied with the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the industry had failed to comply with the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board and that pollution was continuing due to the actions of the industry. The court also held that the industry had failed to take remedial steps to prevent pollution and contamination of the river water. Therefore, the court directed the closure of the industry.
Final Decision: The court directed the closure of the industry on or before 2/02/1998 and directed the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to submit a report regarding compliance of this direction by the Industry within ten days.
( 1 ) AN additional affidavit of Undertaking has been filed in Court today by Mr. P. Natarajan on behalf of the Industry, respondent No. 6.
( 2 ) 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.
( 3 ) 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 33-A 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 directions 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.
( 4 ) 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. "
( 5 ) 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.
( 6 ) 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.
( 7 ) AS already noticed, according to the Board, the seepage from the unlined lagoons in which effluent has been stored joins the drain and ultimately reaches river Bhivani 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 t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.