DURGA GLASS WORKS FIROZABAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the above two writ petitions as there is a common question of law involved.

(2.) Sri Arun Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner in both the petitions, has made a statement at the bar that he does not press the vires of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.). The petitioner's counsel's submission is that the glass industries are not specified in Schedule I as defined in Section 2(c) of the Act, which runs as under :-

(3.) The petitioner's plea is that the glass industry does not fall under schedule as specified industry and as such, cess cannot be levied. It is further pleaded that since there is no consumption of water at all in the factory, the question of pollution does not arise. The petitioner has further pleaded that in the process of manufacturing of glass, moisture is strictly avoided. The glass is obtained from heating silica and water is considered to be an enemy in the process of manufacturing of glass and as such the question of levying cess does not arise. So much so, the question of pollution does not arise. The petitioner has taken further ground that in the manufacturing of ceramic (Porcelene), the water is to be used and there can be no similarity between ceramic industry and glass industry. Therefore, the glass industry cannot fall under ceramic industry.