ORDER

Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that due to pecuniary circumstances the petitioner is required to approach this Court time and again.

3. Our attention is invited to an order passed by respondent No.2 –Karnataka State Pollution Control Board dated 09.02.2022 placed on record at Annexure-A. The caption of the order reads thus:

“Closure directions under Section 31(A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, read with Rule 20(A) of Karnataka Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983.”

4. Learned counsel submits that being aggrieved by the said order the petitioner initially approached this Court in W.P.No.24440/2022. At the time of hearing of the petition, the learned Additional Government Advocate had invited attention of this Court to a statutory remedy available to the petitioner under the provisions of Section 31(1) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and considering the submission of the learned Additional Government Advocate and by making reference to particular provision, by order dated 14.12.2022 Division Bench of this Court dismissed the petition with liberty to petitioner to avail appropriate remedy. The copy of the order dated 14.12.2022 is at Annexure-S. One of us is party to the order dated 14.12.2022.

5. The counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the above order the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority. But for non consideration by the appellate forum the said appeal was pending before the authority and there was no decision. This prompted the petitioner to submit representation to the authority on 18.02.2022 as a representation was also pending for long time the petitioner filed second writ petition namely W.P.No.25741/2022. In the said petition the petitioner made two fold prayer. The first prayer was seeking quashment of order dated 09.02.2022. Second prayer to consider the representation dated:18.02.2022.

6. Counsel for petitioner on instructions submitted before this Court that the petitioner was not pressing prayer (a) and restricted submissions in respect of prayer clause (b). Accordingly vide order dated 22.12.2022 the Division Bench of this Court without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the rival parties thought it fit to dispose of the writ petition with direction to respondent No.2 to address the grievance of the petitioner by considering and passing appropriate orders on the representation dated 18.02.2022 within stipulated period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

7. Counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of a time bound direction there was no progress and the representation was kept pending without there being any decision. The petitioner in this situation was left with no choice but to approach this Court by filing this petition.

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, vehemently submitted that as the petitioner failed to comply with the pre-requisites itself an order dated 09.02.2022 was passed. The counsel for respondent No.2 further submits that the order refers to more than one deficiencies in the unit being operated by the petitioner and as such the order was passed taking recourse to provisions of 31(A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981. The counsel for respondent No.2 also fairly admits that due to non constitution of Appellate Forum though the petitioner preferred an appeal, the same is not yet decided. He also admits that inspite of expiry of the stipulated period as directed in the year

22.12.2022 the representation is not yet decided and same is pending decision.

9. Counsel for petitioner vehemently submitted that the order dated 09.02.2022 and further non action of the authorities is causing serious prejudice to the petitioner and petitioner is unable to carry out the