Closure order upheld for non-compliance with pollution control directives despite hearings; mandatory consent and bank guarantee required.

JUDGEMENT

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

1. The above appeal is directed against the impugned closure order dated 15.07.2022 issued by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB), vide Order No. APPCB/ZO- VJA/EAC/2022, under Section 33 A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 31 A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1981, for causing air and noise pollution.

2. The appellant herein is a proprietor of „M/s. Ratnam Modern Rice Mill & Floor Mill‟, which was established in the year 1986, by the erstwhile owners, duly obtaining a valid license from the concerned authorities.

3. The appellant claims that at the time of establishment, there was neither residential nor human habitation in that area. In the year 2020, the 2^nd Respondent herein constructed a house near the rice mill, without obtaining any permission from the Tandanki Village Gram Panchayat.

4. The further claim of the appellant is that due to a personal rivalry and with a malafide intention, the 2^nd Respondent has filed a writ petition as W.P. No.12269 of 2021 before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh seeking a writ of mandamus to take action against the appellant mill herein for causing severe air and noise pollution, adversely affecting the health of the residents in that area. In the above-said writ petition, the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has passed an order dated 26.09.2021, directing the APPCB to consider the representation given by the writ petitioner therein/2^nd Respondent herein, conduct a thorough enquiry and provide an opportunity of hearing to the complainant and other affected parties. The Hon’ble High Court has also directed the APPCB to make a decision within three months, including possible orders to mitigate pollution, if the mill was found responsible.

5. Pursuant to the above-said directions, the APPCB has issued a show cause notice dated 29.07.2021 to the appellant, based on the inspection done on 24.07.2021 by the Board officials, which is disputed by the appellant, saying there was no inspection done by the Board officials. A reply dated 13.08.2021 has been given to the show cause notice, stating that the unit had obtained all necessary permissions/licenses from the authorities and provided all protective measures and there is no air and noise pollution, as alleged by the complainant/2^nd Respondent.

6. The appellant also denied the fact that he received a notice dated 03.11.2021 from the APPCB directing him to attend the personal hearing held on 05.11.2021 before the External Advisory Committee (EAC). Thereafter, the appellant received a letter dated 08.11.2021 from the APPCB, directing him to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards ensuring compliance with the directions issued by the Board on or before 15.11.2021.

7. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein has preferred a writ petition as W.P. No.29160 of 2021 before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Meanwhile, the 2^nd Respondent herein also filed a writ petition as W.P. No.7737 of 2022 before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, alleging that the appellant rice mill was not adhering to the APPCB’s order dated 08.11.2021 or the Hon’ble High Court’s directives from 29.06.2021. The Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh has passed a common order dated 20.06.2022 in the above- mentioned two writ petitions, stating that “… … … In the absence of any stay of these writ petitions do not preclude the authorities in proceeding further in accordance wit