JADAV SOAP WORKS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed to quash the impugned orders/notices dated 16.12.93, 3.2.94 and 16.2.94(Annexures-l,5 and 6 to the writ application and with a further direction to the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the aforesaid orders. Annexure-1 is a notice issued by the Member Secretary, Pollution Control Board, Assam with regard to the Air pollution caused by the industry of the petitioner and there a direction wa given under Section 31 of the Air(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as amended upto date. That notice is quoted below: "Pollution Control Board, Assam (Science, Technology & Environment Department. Govt. of Assam) No. WB/T-1117/93-94/5 dated Guwahati the 16th Dec '93. To, M/s Jadav Soap Works, Kedar Road, Guwahati, 781001. Subject : Air Pollution Caused by your industry. Subject: Direction under Section 31A of the Air(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as amended upto date. Whereas you are engaged and also associated with the Production Janata Soap in your installation situated at Kedar Road Guwahati-781001 without obtaining Consent from the Board. Whereas inspite of repeated requests through protected correspondance from the Pollution Control Board, you have failed to appear with copies of relevant documents leading to the establishment of the unit at Kedar Road, Guwahati-781001. Whereas you have been running and operating your installation in clear violation of the provision of Acts and Rules. You are hereby directed as follows :- i) You shall close your industry/installation satuated at Kedar Road forth with and report compliance within 22nd Dec' 93. ii) You are hereby prohibited to operate and run your installation/industry at Kedar Road. iii) You shall not be allowed to restart/re- open your industry/installation unless you take all the essential and necessary pollution control measures for running your said industry. It is further directed that :- a) The Assam State Electricity Board shall lake immediate steps to stop/disconnect the supply of electricity required for the purpose of running and operating the industry. and A) The Guwahati Municipal Corporation shall take immediate step/disconnect supply of water required for the purpose of running and operating the said industry. and B) The concerned authorities snail stop/ disconnect the supply of all essential services used as required for the porposes of running and operating the said Installation/Industry at Kedar Road. Please note that in default to comply with the above direction Board shall be compelled do take legal action against you as per provision under the law without any further reference to you. Yours faithfully Sd/.C.C. Bora Member Secretary." Annexure-5 is a notice dated 3.2.1994 by the Member Secretary with regard to the same by way of reminder and Annexure-6 also is a notice dated 16th Feb' 1994 in the same light of Annexure-1.

(2.) The brief facts are as follows:- In the year 1948 the industry of the petitioners was established by the father of the petitioners No. 2 and 3 at Kedar Road. In the year 1981, Air(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 was passed. On 29.9.92 and 13.10.92 a direction was issued by the Pollution Control Board for consent for the small scale industries by the Central Govt. This is Annexure-B to the affidavit- in-opposition filed by the petitioner against the modification order dated.2.3.94. On 16.12.93 the Respondent No. 4 asked the petitioner to close the industry. That is Annexure-1. On 22.12.93 the petitioners prayed for time and stated that no (opportunity was given to show cause prior to issuance of the letter dated 16.12.93 and prayed for one month time to place its case and time was granted upto 13.1.94 by letter dated 29.12.93. The petitioner by letter dated 12.1.94 stated that it is a tiny/small industry and it manufactures laundry soap by manual method and it is like a cottage industry and no water and air pollution is involved in the process. This is Annexure-4 to the writ application. On. 3.2.94 the respondent No.3 by letter asked the petitioner to comply with the provision of the Act of 1981 within 10.2.94. The petitioner by letter dated 9.2.94 requested for supply of application form and enclosed a pay order for Rs. 100/- This is Annexure-5 A. to the writ application. That is quoted below:: Date 9.2.94 To, The Member Secretary, Pollution Control Board, Assam. Sub: Air Pollution Ref: i) Our letter No. Nil dt. 22.12.93 (ii) Our letter No Nil Dt. 12.1.94. Dear Sir, We acknowledge with thanks the receipt of your letter No. WB/T-117/93-94/10, dated 3.2.94 on the above subject. In this connection we would like to inform you that father Late S.C. Das established this industry way back in forties when no pollution control Act was in operation in the country. After the demise of our father we are managing the industry for last few decades and till we received your letter in December 1993, no body questioned about the possibility of our pollution that may be erected by our industry. Vide our industry, where to manufacture the laundry soap, the raw material is just boiled in the pans and colled down to make soap. Under the circumstances we would like to request you to kindly issue us the necessary application forms to enable us to obtain required consent/No objection from your esteemed institution. We are enclosing herewith a pay order for Rs. 100/- (Rupees one hundred only) vide No. 884935, dated 9.2.94 for application fees. Thanking you. Yours faithfully for Jadav Soap works." Before supplying the application form for consent, the Respondents No. 3 and 4 issued letter dated 16.2.94 to close the petitioners industry. That is Annexure-6 to the writ application Application form was supplied on 17.2.94, but notice under Section 31A was issued to close the unit by letter dated 16.2.94 without giving any opportunity to apply for consent. Hence, this writ application.

(3.) An affidavit-in-opposition as well as an additional affidavit-in-opposition have been filed on behalf of the Respondents Nos. 3,4 and 5 and affidavit-in reply has, also been filed on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard Mr. B R Dey, learned Advocate for. the petitioners, Mr. P.G. Baruah, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 6 and Mr. A H Saikia, learned Advocate for the Respondents No. 3,4 and 5 and the Central Govt. Standing counsel for the Union of India, Respondent No. 1 and the learned Govt. Advocate, Assam for the Respondent No. 2 State of Assam.