Karnataka High Court
H K Prasanna Kumar vs Karnataka State Pollution Control ... on 6 November, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar
.2; N."Pfarié:1hadha
_ 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6"' my OF NOVEMBER, 2009
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.P.D.DINA KARAN, CHIEF JusT:céfTTTTT%
AND
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE MOHANSTHANTT?NAZ§(3lTb2§R A
WRIT PETITION No.12735/20%V(G}N\4?OLLU'TZEG!§lMT.j:;'f
BETWEEN:
1. H.K.Prasanna Kumar.
S/0 Kri'Sh11a}§ipa '7: V _
Aged about 26-'ye.afsM " -- .
Resident of Hampéinah gm. '
JiganiPust . ' '
Anekal 'I'a1U.k* V ._
Ban;gaIQre--562 'A106.
2 ~ S'/C,V;.e;.,g§j:.:~§a:g*3'cL,y<111o.§>;><x. *
A r. Aged' about 32. V years
'Resident (Sf-Narasimhaswami Layout,
Near K_um_ai".= Organics Products
V Anei~:a1"'Main Road,
Jiganivfiost.
., 2~'meka1 Taluk,
K " Ba1Tgalore--562 106.
3. J.C.Krishnappa
S / 0 Gundappa
Aged about 32 years
SLN Temple Road.
Jigani
J igani Post,
Anekal Taluk
Bangal0re~»562 106.
4. S.Manu
S / o Siddareddy
Aged about 34 years
Resident of Jigani.
Anekal Main Road
Anekal Taluk,
Bangalore~562 106.
5. Ramesh
S/o M.BasaV.aradI:ya 1.
Aged about.41~.2 y'_ears,. I ' _
Resident of Rajar'aj'eshWaziilmediczials, '
Near Jigani.VParie_l1ayath Offiee"
Jigani """
Anekla Taluk,-1 *
Bangalore"--562 ~ '4.
6. M.Ya,davarri11__i'lthy
S /«Q Muniyappa. A
. Aged about 32 yeéirs"
. 'R..e_s1d_en1; ofgiigani,
A "'Ane1;g1« .i;'a1u£:_
~_Barigalore.g5'€;2' 106. .. Petitioners
[ lX.v'£7i.Gangadharappa, Advocate }
_ L Karnataka State Pollution
Control Board,
it "Represented by: its
Member Secretary
Parisara Bhavana,
4"' & 5* Floors,
Church Street,
Bangalore--56O 001
. The Deputy Commissioner,
Bangalore Urban District.
Bangalore.
. The Zilla Panchayath,
Bangalore Urban District,
Represented byd its
Chief Executive Officer
Krushi Bhavana,
Hudson Circle,
K.G.Road,
Bangalore--560 009.
. Taluk Panchayath,
Anekal Taluk
Anekal,l-byl lE§éeg:ut'l\ze V
Bangalore--Dis_t1fiACtl.4V , '
. The Tahsildar' _ °
Anekal 'l"alul:,V anelial " l
Bangalore 'Rgra1..r)ast:rict¥562 106.
l .. Jiganiijfirarna Panohayath,
'Jigani, represented by its
' .Ar1_ekai «'l"_al_ul»:5' ' ' "
Bangalore' -Rural Distri(:t--562 106.
Kallubalu Grama Panchayath,
' n Represented by its Secretary,
Kallubalu,
._ Anekal Taluk
Bangalore Rural District--562 106.
-4-
8. Kurnar Organic Products Ltd.,
Unitwll, Sy.No.49 and 8/1,
Harapanahalli Village,
Jigani Hobli. Anekal Taluk,
Represented by its Secretary.
9. The Managing Director,
Kumar Organic Products Ltd.,
Harapanahalli Village
Jigani Hobli,
Anekal Taluk f
Bangalore-562 106. '..«-Regsploiidents g_ A'
{ By Sri Gangadhara Sangolli, _Advoe-ateV.for R--,l1TT, " 1 .
Sri Rsharathchandra, Advoeate for "R-4, .R--6.v&'«VR:v?
Srnt.Akkamahadev1' Hiremath; Advocate. for E48 81
And Sri sveerappa. AGA ror.oR;j2o&u3»~5 J'
This Writ Petition i:s"filed"1.1i1der_ 226 81 227 of the
Constitution to the respondents 1 to 7 to
forthwith,to'- eanoelliiihet granted to respondent No.8 and
take necesssgéuy aetio!is,. llétgeinst respondents 8 and 9 for
Violating the fix'-aivisionstlof tlle Environment Protection Act. the
Waste' 'vvémianaging 8: Handling] Act. the Air
(Preventi_on_and--Control of Pollution} Act, 1981 and the Water
A(i?rex.fention-gtridgi'Control of Pollution} Act, 1974-.
A [Petition is coming on for hearing on this day,
11_v:oHA21 SEIANTANAGOUDAR, 3.. delivered the following-
W5,
JUDGMENT
This public interest litigation is filed praying for direction in the nature of mandamus to respondents I to 7 to take necessary action forthwith against respondents 8 for Violating the provisions of the Environment Protection' Hazardous Waste [Managing & Handling}...,l,l§ctv,V ill./tlie (Prevention and Control of Pollution! 1:98; [Prevention and Control of Pollotion}act,ri974. " 1 it 'A
2. The petitioners are the 'residents of and Jigani Villages of Their children havellladmittevd to various schools situated in Jigani and.__ The respondents 8 and 9 are allegedly mani1factui*ing' and producing the organic products Whictz 'generate poisionous gas and sazardous chemical l'effllt1ents.._l'»-xg«.rhilch_l_}~ are let out in the environment and cons»e_ouentl3f;:§'..-- the same has lead to health hazard to the ~ ;:aetitionk:rV_S'3~and other residents of the society. mgr During the course of hearing, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of contesting respondents i.e., respontierits s and 9 has filed a memo dated 6.11.2009 Which_re.adls " Respondents 8 8: 9 sub-mitl_lt11at"._the« Pyrithione Unit has been closed'do:\rrri,ll has been under the process'lof..shiftinglto plant at Baroda in Gujarat el.ai'te_r and clearance fronithe 1'«Iinisti;yfll»of._ Environment and Forests is also granted by the Department Boilers, Bangalore; 'shifting copies of request 8 Br 9 and also perm_i_ssion"' Department are furnished 'l*1;ere\Xrith ' . _ * From aforementioned' memo, it is clear that the Zinc Pyrithi~;Jne hasbeen closed down, and it has been under ofrshiftinlgmto its new plant at Baroda in Gujarat after; fconsent from the concerned authorities. Permi-s__sion~ jlraiso given by the Department of Factories & 3u""«._lBoilerS, Bahgalore, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore, for the unit. The copy of the permission granted by the ggparunent is also produced along with the memo. The memo P' -7- dated 6.11.2009 filed by the ondents 8 and 9 along with the annexure is taken on record and the contents therein are recorded.
In View of the contents found in the menrt) annexures, the grievance of the peti.t.i0ners_--'doesf_not*survive any more. According to the learrieded counsel "fi'_1'e respondents 8 and 9,they are'sh-iftingddthde factovrj/A»».1%:IcIyV the end of February 2010. HoweVer7_':they'-- .haVe"a1rea'1dyvfc1osed the unit and the same is no't'..fiinct}§on;Vti1.trg§'_In:view of the same, no further orders are necessary, in. the w1'i't"-petifioti. Acvfcorddingiy, H petition is disposed of after recording ' the conten' vrbungd m' the memo. Z ..... Justice,-
sd/..
IUDGE