T.T. LTD. Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.368 of 2011, U.P. Pollution Control Board Vs. M/s T.T. Limited and others, under Sec. 43/44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short ?the Act, 1974?) as well as the order dtd. 23/1/2020 passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, E.C. Act, Lucknow in Criminal Revision No.303 of 2015 and the orders dtd. 8/7/2015 and 19/2/2020 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Pollution/C.B.I., Lucknow.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present dispute are that applicant no.1, T.T. Limited, is a company having its registered office at 879, Master Prithvi Nath Marg, Opp. Azmal Khan Park, Karol Bagh, New Delhi engaged in the business of Cotton Yarn and Knitted Fabric. It carries out the non- polluting process of manufacturing yarn through its mill, namely, Gajroula Spinning Mill at Gajroula, which is 100% eco friendly and there is no use of water in the factory and as such no trade effluent is discharged from the factory. Applicant no.2 was the Chairman and Managing Director of the company at that time and he has engaged Sri. B.C. Jain, applicant no.5, as Factory Manager (Occupier) and Vice President (Technical), who was responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.3 was the Director of the company at the relevant time and was not looking after the day-to-day activity of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.4 was the Secretary of the company at that time and he was also not looking after the day-to-day activity of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.5 was the Factory Manager (Occupier) and Vice President (Technical) of the company and was responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.6 was the Director of the company at that time and he was not looking after the day- to-day activity of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.7 was the Vice President (Sales and Marketing) of the company at that time. Moreover, he is sitting and working at the Corporate Office, New Delhi only and has nothing to do with the day-to-day activity of the Gajroula Unit. Applicant no.8 was the Administrative Officer of the company at that time and he was also sitting and working at the Corporate Office, New Delhi and had nothing to do with the day-to-day activity of the Gajroula Unit and presently he is retired. Applicant nos.9, 10 and 11 were independent non- executive Directors of the company at that time and were not involved in day-to-day affairs of the company.

(3.) It is stated that the Companies Act, 1956 does not provide the specific definition of an independent Director, but independent Directors are non-executive Director of a company, who helps the company in improving corporate credibility and governance standards. It is pertinent to mention here that all the Directors of applicant no.1 are respectable personalities having good reputation in the society and applicant no.9 is the recipient of the Padam Shree Award.