G S PRASANNA KUMAR Vs. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above public interest litigation is filed for issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 Boards namely, the Kamataka State Pollution Control Board and Central Pollution control Board to identify and prescribe appropriate effluent treatment systems for respondents-6 to 23, taking into account the best available technologies including "zero Pollution Technology" and to direct the respondents -1 and 3 to issue closure notices to Distilleries which do not have the 'zero Pollution Technology' in place until respondents -1 and 3 identify and prescribe for distilleries the best available technologies and they are implemented.

(2.) ACCORDING to Sri B. K. Sampath Kumar, learned Counsel for petitioner, the "zero Pollution Technology" is more efficient in treatment of effluents and it can be set up by Distilleries with equipments that are locally available, the Zero Pollution Technology is also called as "fermented molasses Solubles (FMS) or condensed Molasses Technology which can achieve treatment of effluents more effectively at 1/5 the cost of setting up a sugar factory and such technology results in additional benefit of providing of Cattle feed or Bio-Fertilizers. He further submits that said "zero Pollution Technology" is being implemented in foreign countries like europe and USA and are being adopted in the neighbouring State of Goa.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for respondents -1 to 3 submits that all the contesting respondents viz. , the distilleries companies are permitted to operate only after getting consent from the 1st respondent Pollution Control Board and permission is accorded only after satisfying that the distilleries companies have fulfilled all the conditions contemplated in the relevant statutes. The respondents -1 to 3 also submits that as on today, there is no violation of any of the conditions or any of the rulings of the Apex Court; in the event if it is brought to their notice of any violation, conditions of consent, provisions of the statute or the Rulings of the Court, certainly they would take stringent action against such erring distilleries companies in the manner known to law and if it is found to be true, the respondents 1 to 3 would have no hesitation to take steps for closure of such companies.