LAWS(MAD)-2021-10-148

MOHAMED RABI Vs. CHAIRMAN

Decided On October 08, 2021
Mohamed Rabi Appellant
V/S
CHAIRMAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges an order of the first respondent dtd. 22/9/2021 and consequently seeks approval and permission to run the business under the name and style of M/s.Al-Ameen Traders at 28-A, Rathakrishnan Street, Chellaiah Colony, Chokkanathapuram, Madurai.

(2.) The petitioner states that he has been carrying on business in the above mentioned location and participated in the electricity scrap tenders of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board for the past ten years. A neighbouring house owner, namely, Deepan, instituted proceedings before this Hon'ble Court in W.P(MD).No.8677 of 2021 dtd. 28/4/2021. Based on his complaint, it is stated that the Division Bench of this Court directed the officials of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to undertake a surprise inspection of the premises of the petitioner and take stringent action. Pursuant thereto, it is stated that the show- cause notice dtd. 3/5/2021 was issued and such notice was replied to on 09 . 07 . 2021 . According to the petitioner, the impugned order was issued without duly taking into consideration the reply of the petitioner. The petitioner also points out that he has requested for consent under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (in short "the Air Act") and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (in short "the Water Act"). The petitioner points out that the electricity service connection was disconnected on 23/9/2021 and, therefore, the petitioner is unable to run his business.

(3.) Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned counsel for the State, accepts notice on behalf of respondents and Mr.P.Athimoolapandian, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the fifth respondent. Mr.Athimoolapandian points out that the petitioner should approach the jurisdictional National Green Tribunal and that an appellate remedy is provided for both under the Water Act and Air Act. Therefore, he submits that the writ petition is not maintainable.