M/S.ROMANA DISTILLERY INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD REP. BY ITS MANAGER, SANAL K.S. NO.5/1 THIRUKKURUNGUDI POST TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT TAMIL NADU Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, TIRUNELVELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a company known as M/s.Romana Distillery Industries Private Ltd. The said company is engaged in the manufacturing of packaged drinking water. For the said purpose, the petitioner company has dug a Well in the land comprised in S.Nos.42/1 and 42/3A at Magilady Village, Tirunelveli District, for drawing water from the said Well for the said business purpose. The petitioner applied for No Objection Certificate from the Water Resources Department, Government of Tamil Nadu. The Chief Engineer, State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre, Chennai, issued a certificate in Certificate No.423/NOC/Chennai/2014 dated 11.09.2014 expressing no objection for drawal of a total quantity of 10,000 litres per day from the said Well for the purpose of packaged drinking water. The petitioner further claims that he also applied for consent from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board for the said purpose. The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Tirunelveli by his proceedings in No.F.TNV1430/GS/A/2014 dated 14.11.2014 has authorised the said company to establish the industry in the site mentioned and to operate the same. The Department of Industry and Commerce has also granted permission for the petitioner for doing the packaged drinking water manufacturing as per Form No.2014/33/029/18659/PRDT. According to the petitioner, though he has satisfied all the legal formalities in getting either no objection or permission from the various authorities, the manufacturing process has not yet been commenced. While so, the respondent issued a show cause notice under Notice No.C3/48935/14 dated 30.12.2014 purportedly under Sec. 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be restrained from doing the said business by drawing water from the Well. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 08.01.2015, wherein, he had stated that he had already obtained all necessary orders granting permission or no objection from the various authorities and that the manufacturing had not yet been commenced. Yet another notice was subsequently issued by the District Collector on 12.01.2015 in No.C3/48935/2014 that was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by way of writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.3093 of 2015 and this Court by order dated 09.03.2015 disposed of the said petition with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the District Collector on 10.03.2015 and submit his detailed reply and with a further direction to the authorities concerned to consider the same and to pass appropriate orders. In pursuance of the same, the petitioner appeared before the respondent and submitted relevant records such as the orders obtained from various authorities and also explained to the District Collector that he had not commenced the manufacturing. He further submitted that since drawal of water from the Well is going to be done in accordance with the orders obtained from the various authorities, it will not amount to nuisance in terms of Sec. 133 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Having considered all the above, the respondent, by his proceedings in RoC.No.C3/48935/2014 dated 18.04.2015, has passed the final order under Sec. 133 of the Code, thereby prohibiting drawal of ground water by the petitioner company through the new open Well or bore well or in any other manner. The District Collector has also ordered for the closure of the Unit. He has further directed the Tahsildar, Nanguneri to ensure the closure of the Unit and disconnection of electricity for the purpose of drawal of water. It is this order, which is under challenge in this revision.

(3.) In this revision, the learned Senior Counsel raised three grounds among other grounds.