Industrial units must obtain necessary pollution-related clearances to operate, and environmental protection laws are backed by the courts.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings along with the annexures thereto and also the original record produced by the respondent no. 2 concerning the matter.

2. The petitioner, ever since its coming into existence as a business concern, seems to be bent upon to act more in conflict mood rather than in conformity mode with the provisions of law governing pollution related permissions for the purpose of running an industrial concern and for that has even felt no hesitation to hoodwink the authorities concerned and even this court as well.

3. The petitioner is claimed to be a proprietorship concern set up by its promotor Summit Kour and which got itself registered on 12.01.2018 as a Micro Scale Industrial Unit. For the purpose of site for its industry related activity, the petitioner came to hire on rent basis a ground-floor accommodation of building situated at Plot no. 529, backside of Chinar Biscuit, Shankar Colony, Gangyal Jammu. The premises hired by the petitioner on lease basis is from the husband of its proprietor Smt. Sumit Kour. The petitioner intended to carry on manufacturing of Polythene Carry-bags (above 50 microns specification) .

4. For the purpose of carrying on such industrial activity, the petitioner was required to avail pollution related permissions from the J&K State Pollution Control Board and for that purpose on 26.09.2018 applied online for consent to establish (CTE) followed by an online application filed on 06.10.2018 for consent to operate (CTO) before the respondent no. 2. Both the said applications came to be rejected by the respondent no. 2 vide its decisions dated 21.01.2019 and 02.02.2019 on the premise that the industrial activity of the nature intended to be run by the petitioner was not allowed in a non-conforming/residential areas.

5. It appears that notwithstanding the rejection of its request for issuance of consent to establish & operate its industrial activity, the petitioner ventured to start and run the industrial activity which immediately got the attention of the respondent no. 2 resulting in an inspection raid on 31.01.2019 which led to seizure of 1350 kgs of banned polythene bags from the premises of the petitioner. This inspection and seizure of the petitioner's premises by the respondent no. 2's officials was carried out by reference to the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Non-Biodegradable Material (Management, Handling and Disposal) Act, 2007 read with rules frame thereunder vide SRO 122 of 2009 dated 11.05.2009 known as J&K Non-Biodegradable Material (Management, Handling and Disposal) Rules, 2009, further amended vide SRO 45 of 2017 dated 03.02.2017 laying down Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 whereby there is a ban on manufacturing of polythene carry bags below 50 microns thickness.

6. Upon the seizure of the polythene bags of the quantity of 1350 kg, the Authorized Officer (Regional Director) of the respondent no. 2 came to serve a notice no. SPCB/19/1535-39 dated 06.02.2019 to the petitioner's proprietor for appearance on 27.02.2019 as part of statutory exercise required in furtherance of seizure so made by the Enforcement Wing (Anti-Polythene Team) of the respondent no. 2.

7. Finding the petitioner acting in conflict with the pollution related provisions of law, the respondent no. 2, vide its order no. 24-SPCB/2019 dated 15.05.2019, came to issue a closure order of the petitioner's unit/premises thereby bringing the unauthorised industrial activity of the petitioner to a cease.

8. In furtherance of the seizure of the 1350 kg of banned polythene bags effected on 31.01.2019, said seized property came to suffer confiscation by an order no. SPCD/RDJ/18/1/4770-73 dated 25.05.2019 passed by the Authorized Officer (Regional Director) of the respondent no. 2. It is worth mentioning herein that this order of confiscation was never ever questioned/challenged at any point of time by the petitioner.

9. On the other hand, in furtherance of closure order no