G JAGANNATHA PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this petition is directed against the appointment of the 3rd respondent Dr. Dangeri, as Chairman of Karnataka State Pollution control Board. The petition which inter alia seeks a writ of quo warranto and purports to have been filed in public interest assails the appointment in question on precisely speaking two distinct grounds. Firstly, it is urged that respondent Dr. Bangeri does not qualify for appointment in the light of the requirements of Section 4 (2) of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, in that he does not possess any special knowledge or experience in administering institutions dealing with the said matters. Alternatively, it is urged that the petitioner is disqualified from being appointed as Chairman under Section 6 (f) of the Act on account of he being the proprietor of a concern called M/s. B. P. Consultants, Hubli, which was providing consultancy service in Environmental Engineering to various private organisations and was on the panel of approved consultants of the State Pollution control Board.

(2.) THE respondents have stoutly defended the appointment under challenge and urged that Dr. Bangeri was fully eligible for appointment and did not suffer from any disqualification prescribed under Section 6 supra. In the light of the view that I propose to take I consider it proper to deal with the alternative submission made on behalf of the petitioners first.

(3.) SECTION 6 of the Act prescribes the disqualifications for appointment as a member of the Board and to the extent the same is relevant for our purposes reads thus: