JAGATJIT INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. PUNJAB POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition assails the validity of an order dated 27.6.2008 passed by the Punjab Pollution Control Board, Patiala, issuing directions under Section 33-A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act'), and proceedings of even date based on a personal hearing held on 23.6.2008, whereunder certain further directions regarding compliance of the provisions of the Act aforementioned, have been issued by the Board. The petitioner also prays for a mandamus directing the respondent-Board to permit the petitioner to operate its industrial unit to its full capacity and to extend the time for filling up of two katcha Lagoons and submission of the scheme for rejuvenation of ground water by a further period of four months. In addition, the petitioner seeks extension of time to instal and commission the equipment's (Boiler, Evaporator and Incinerator) by 12 months from the date of passing of the order. It has also prayed for dispensing with the condition, under which the petitioner has been asked to furnish a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 75 lacs to the respondent-Board. The controversy arises in the following circumstances.

(2.) THE petitioner-company has established and is running a distillery and a food division in the name and style of Jagatjit Industries at G.T. Road, Hamira, District Kapurthala (Punjab). It claims to be producing approximately 120 KL of alcohol per day in its distillery. The Food Division is similarly producing a number of food items sold under different brand names. Since the industrial process which the petitioner's unit undertake is prone to cause pollution, the respondent Pollution Control Board appears to have taken note and pointed out shortcomings in compliance with the statutory requirements, and directed removal of the same. The measures taken by the petitioner were not, however, to the satisfaction of the Board, who appears to have withdrawn the consent given by it in terms of Sections 25 and 26 of the Act. Aggrieved, the petitioner has appealed to the competent Appellate Authority. It is not in dispute that said appeal is pending disposal even at present.

(3.) BY a separate order passed on the same date and described as "proceedings of personal hearing taken by the Chairman of the Board on 23.6.2008", the following directions were issued by the Board :-