W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 20.12.2021

CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI,

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2021 and

W.M.P.(MD).Nos.19024 and 19025 of 2021

Lazer

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Chairman,

Tamil Nadu Polution Control Board,

No.76, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennao-600 032.

2. The District Collector,

Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

3. The District Environment Engineer,

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,

Water Tank Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari.

4. The Executive Engineer,

Palugal Town Panchayat,

Palugal Post, Kanyakumari District.

5. C.Alexander Joseph

.. Respondents

PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for

the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings passed by the

1

st respondent herein, in Proceedings No.TNPCB/T2/F.023606/NGL/

Sealing/W&A/2021, dated 16.11.2021 and quash the same as illegal

and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein, to open the

petitioner's Small Scale Industry in the name and style, of

''L.V.S. Cement Works'' situated at R.S.No.116/11, Near Triveni

Medical Centre, Kannumamoodu, Palugal Village, Kanyakumari

District, forthwith.

For Petitioner

: Mr.C.Kishore

For R1 & R3

: Mrs.Vijayalakshmi Natarajan

For R2

: Mr.P.Subbaraj

Special Government Pleader

For R4

: Mr.Ramesh Arumugam

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]

By this writ petition, the challenge is made to the order

dated 16.11.2021 passed by the Chairman, Tamilnadu Pollution

Control Board, to seal the unit. The order aforesaid was passed

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.22493 of 2021

referring to Section 33A of the Water (P&CP) Act, 1974 as amended

in 1988 and Section 31A of the Air (P&CP) Act, 1981 as amended in

1987.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

impugned order has been passed by the Chairman, Tamil Nadu

Pollution Control Board, without giving an opportunity of hearing.

Referring to the show cause notice, he submits that despite a reply

to it, the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, ignored

it, rather, recorded a finding that no reply to the show cause

notice was given, going contrary to the record.

3. In view of the above, the impugned order deserves to be set

aside. However, the quasi-judicial authority is required to follow

the principles of natural justice in passing the orders. In the

instant case, the petitioner was denied opportunity of hearing,

despite the fact that his industrial unit has been ordered to be

sealed.

4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

5. Perusal of the order shows that the petitioner was

operating industrial unit without a consent from the Tamil Nadu

Pollution Control Board. The fact aforesaid is quite relevant and

goes to the root of the case. The counsel for the petitioner was

asked to refer the consent order to operate the industrial unit.

He fairly admits that the consent letter has not been issued by the

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. Though he had referred to the

submission of the on-line application for it, mere submission of

on-line application does not allow the industrial unit to run. It

can be only when the consent is given by the Tamil Nadu Pollution

Control Board.

6. In view of the facts aforesaid, we do not find a case for

remand of the matter to the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control

Board, for hearing, because, it would be a post-decisional hearing

and as an empty formality to comply with the principles of natural

justice. In fact, the principles of natural justice are to be

followed, when no illegality is committed and the righ