ASHOK SHEKAPPA MUDAKAVI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition is filed as public interest litigation against illegal operation of stone crusher units in and around village: Kolhar, Basavan Bagewadi Taluk, Vijayapura District. It is alleged that the stone crusher units were established and working in contravention of the provisions of Section 6 of the Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Act, 2011 ('Act' for short). It is further alleged that, on account of declaration of certain areas as 'safer zones' under the said Act, some of the crusher units were claiming to be operating in safer zones although such zone was within a distance of 500 meters of Kolhar village and 250 meters from the National Highway. The challenge to declaration of safer zones vide proceedings of District Level Stone Crushing Control Committee held on 02.11.2012 is not substantiated by any relevant evidence.

(2.) It was, however, found during the course of hearing that, not only respondent Nos. 7 to 14 herein, but few other stone crushing units were operating in the area without consent or without fulfilling the requisite conditions under the provisions of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ('Air Act' for short). And, on account of series of violations, orders in exercise of powers under Section 31A of the Air Act have been issued to forthwith close down the operation of such stone crushers. In some cases, detailed orders are made by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board to not only close down the stone crusher units forthwith, but orders have been issued to the Deputy Commissioner of the District to seize such stone crusher units and the Managing Director of Hubli Electricity Supply Company (HESCOM) is also directed to stop power supply to such units. By such orders issued in July 2014, the Chief Electrical Inspector in the office of Chief Electrical Inspectorate, Bengaluru is directed to stop the operation of diesel generator sets immediately and until further orders.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has alleged, on the basis of sketchy affidavits of some of the petitioners that the stone crusher units have been operating even after such orders of State Pollution Control Board and no further preventive actions were taken by the authorities to whom the directions were issued under the Air Act. By placing on record a number of photographs, it is contended on behalf of stone crusher units joined herein as respondent Nos. 7 to 14 that, the industrial units have actually closed their operations and the plants are lying idle without the diesel generator sets being reconnected to even temporarily run the industrial units. It is contended on their behalf that such units under the orders of closure proposed to comply with the conditions which may be imposed by the State Pollution Control Board and obtain valid consent for the purpose of running the units in a legal manner. However, due to pendency of the petition, State Pollution Control Board is not entertaining their applications, according to their submission.