SHAILA PAI Vs. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 2 to consider the representations dtd. 5/3/2022 and 9/3/2022. They have also sought quashing of the notice of proposed directions dtd. 30/11/2021 and the closure order dtd. 5/3/2022 issued under Sec. 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act , 1974 (for short, 'the Act') read with Rule 34 of the Karnataka State Board for the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution (Procedure for Transaction of Business and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1976.

(2.) Perusal of the notice dtd. 30/11/2021 at Annexure-E shows that on a public complaint made regarding well water contamination in Kandegujji, Kemmunnu area of Udupi District, the Regional Office, Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (for short 'the Board'), Udupi inspected the industrial unit of the petitioners and found certain illegalities. Therefore, respondent No.2 issued notice of proposed directions to the petitioners. When the petitioners did not reply to the notice dtd. 30/11/2021, the Member Secretary of the Board issued closure order directing petitioner No.2 - the proprietor of the industry to close the unit and directed the concerned Authority to disconnect power supply to the unit.

(3.) In a similar set of circumstances, a writ petition was filed before this Court in Writ Petition No.22831/2021 and this Court, by the order dtd. 8/11/2022 observed that alternative remedy of an appeal under Sec. 33B of the Act is available to the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum, if so advised. The relevant paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said order is extracted hereunder: