Back
2020 Supreme(Kar) 393
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Abhay S. Oka, Ashok S. Kinagi, JJ.
Paragon Polymers Products Private Limited And Others - Appellants
Versus
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board And Others - Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.5847/2020, 5808/2020, 5446/2020, 5456/2020, 5495/2020, 5562/2020, 5132/2020, 5146/2020, 5502/2020, 5151/2020, 5684 of 2020 and 5755 of 2020 (GM-POL)
Decided On : 16-03-2020
Sri Shivaraj N. Arali., Advocate, for the Appellant in Writ Petition Nos.5847, 5808, 5495, 5562, 5132, 5146, 5502, 5151, 5684 & 5755/2020; Sri Rajiv Khaitan, Advocate, for the Appellant in W.P. No.5446/2020; Sri Om Prakash Agarwal, Advocate, for the Appellant in W.P.No.5456/2020; Sri Gururaj Joshi, Advocate, for the Respondent in all appeals
Failure to justify demands for environmental compensation charges with statutory provisions or binding orders renders the demands unsustainable.
Headnote:
Environmental Compensation - Challenge to Notices - Court sets aside demands for interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges due to failure to justify the demands with statutory provisions or binding orders
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the notices issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) demanding interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges based on orders of the National Green Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the demands for environmental compensation charges were not justified as there was no specific direction issued by the National Green Tribunal or statutory provision authorizing the KSPCB to claim or demand such amounts. The court also noted that the impugned notices did not state that any statutory power had been exercised by the KSPCB for making the demands, and no opportunity of being heard was granted to the petitioners before quantifying the demands.
Issues: Challenge to demands for interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges based on National Green Tribunal orders and statutory provisions authorizing the KSPCB to claim or demand such amounts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court set aside the demands for interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges on the ground of the failure to justify the demands by referring to any statutory provisions or any binding order. The court clarified that if the petitioners have committed any default in compliance with environmental statutes, it will be the obligation of the KSPCB to initiate action in accordance with the law.
Final Decision: The court set aside the demands for interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges and directed the KSPCB to take action in accordance with the law if the petitioners have committed violations of environmental statutes. The writ petitions were disposed of on these terms.
JUDGMENT
1. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (for short KSPCB).
2. In W.P.Nos.5847, 5808, 5495, 5562, 5132, 5146, 5502, 5151, 5684, 5755 and 5847 of 2020, there is a challenge to the notices issued at Annexure-A by which, demands for interim environmental compensation or environmental compensation charges based on the orders of the National Green Tribunal have been made. Similarly, in W.P.Nos.5446 and 5456 of 2020, there is a challenge to Annexures-Q and L respectively wherein the challenge is same.
3. The demand of environmental compensation charges is based on the orders dated 10th July 2019 and 14th November 2019 in O.A.No.1038/2018 and the order dated 11th January 2019 in O.A.No.95/2018. The copies of the said orders along with the memo are placed on record in W.P.No.5495/2020. After going through the said orders, we find that no direction has been issued by the National Green Tribunal against KSPCB or State Pollution Control Boards to recover or demand environmental compensation whether interim or otherwise, or environmental compensation charges. When we called upon the learned counsel appearing for KSPCB to point out any such direction issued by the National Green Tribunal or a specific provision under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short the Water Act), the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (for short the Air Act) and the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 (for short the said Act of 1986), which authorizes State Pollution Control Boards to claim or demand such amount, the learned counsel is unable to show any provision or direction of National Green Tribunal to justify the demand for interim environment compensation or environmental compensation charges.
4. In any case, the impugned notices which are referred above do not state that any statutory power has been exercised by the KSPCB for making the demands. Therefore, the demands cannot be sustained. Moreover, no opportunity of being heard was granted to the petitioners before quantifying the demands. Hence, impugned demands cannot be sustained.
5. However, we must make it clear that if the petitioners have committed any default in compliance with the provisions of the Air Act, the Water Act and the said Act of 1986 or any Rules framed under the said statutes, it will be the obligation of the KSPCB to initiate action in accordance with law.
6. With the above observations and clarification, we pass the following order:
(i) The impugned demands for interim environmental compensation or for environmental compensation charges are hereby set aside only on the ground of the failure to justify the demands by referring to any statutory provisions or any binding order;
(ii) Notwithstanding the aforesaid direction of setting aside of the orders of demand, it will be the obligation of the KSPCB to take action in accordance with law in the event the petitioners have committed violation of the provisions of the Air Act or the Water Act or the said Act of 1986 or any Rules or order made under the said statutes;
(iii) The writ petitions are disposed of on the above terms.
