Madras High Court
South India Salt Manufacturers ... vs Tamil Nadu Electricity Board ... on 17 April, 1996
Equivalent citations: (1996)2MLJ175
Author: Ar. Lakshmanan
Bench: Ar. Lakshmanan
ORDER AR. Lakshmanan, J.
1. The above writ petition has been filed by the South India Salt Manufacturers Association, a registered body under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act and the Rules made thereunder, for the following relief:
To issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to forthwith take all necessary and effective steps to discharge the ash slurry let out from the North Madras Thermal Power Project (hereinafter referred to as NMTPP), through some other alternate source, without discharging the same into the salt lands in the North Madras Belt, viz., Athipattu South, North, Thillai and Vallur Salt Factory areas as also the back waters of Pulicot lake and Buckingham Canal over an extent of 5,000 acres in the occupation of the members of the petitioner- association as lessees-cum -licencees under the 4th respondent, thereby keeping the said salt manufacturing lands in Athipattu, etc., villages in Chengai- M.G.R. District, free from any pollutions as undertaken by respondents 1 and 2.
2. The facts in short are as follows: The members of the petitioner- association are the licencees under the 4th respondent. The lands forming the subject matter of the writ petition situated in Athipattu Salt Factory area in Chennai, M.G.R. District are under the jurisdiction of the 4th respondent. Salt manufacture is being carried out in an extent of about 4,819 acres in and around Athipattu village by the members of the petitioner- association, for the last several decades, having taken the said lands on lease form the Government of India through the Salt Department. Salt production and allied activities form the main source of livelihood for the villagers of Athipattu and other villages situated in the vicinity of NMTPP.
3. There are about 126 small and big salt manufacturing units in and around Athipattu village, which depend upon the saline waters of the Pulicot river back waters and Buckingham Canal for salt production, the details of which are given below:
Name of the Salt factory No of Units Area licensed for salt manufacture Athipattu North 29 570.42 Acres Athipattu South 41 924.00 "
Thillai 2 740.99 "
Voyalur 4 1,750.43"
Vallur 46 833.11 "126
4,818.95
4. There were some more salt manufacturing units in the above villages. In or about 1992, several pieces of salt pan lands of the Government of India were transferred to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for the establishment of the NMTPP and the works connected therewith, as under:
Name of Village Area (Hectares) transfered Purpose Voyalur 198.10 Ash Dump Area Athipattu 18.39 Ash brick production Puzhidhivakkam 26.06 Ash dump area Athipattu 4.78 Ash Slurry pipe line The NMTPP authorities had, thus, acquired from the Salt Department certain pieces of lands for the specific purpose of carrying the ash generated in the project in the form of a slurry and dumping it in a separate dyke so that the ash does not get strewn all over the place and does not pollute the atmosphere and the saline water sources of the salt industry in the area.
5. A meeting was held on 26.8.1992 in the Chamber of the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, wherein the Chief Engineer and other officials of the project have given several assurances for safeguarding the interest of the salt manufacturers. The 4th respondent also participated in the said meeting. The record of discussion was reduced in the form of minutes. Discussions were held in regard to the formation of temporary and permanent roads for the use of salt licensees for movement of salt without hindrance, de-touring the road in Puzhudhivakkam village as the existing salt road is coming within the area to be acquired for the ash bund construction, improvement of the Athipattu Thillai salt road at the request of the 4th respondent, construction of permanent bridge across Pulicot back waters and various other subjects. Regarding the sewerage water from quarters, the 4th respondent has requested that the soilage water shall not be let out into the Pulicot back waters from which the water is being drawn for the production of salt. It was informed that the sullage and sewerage will be treated by treatment plant and only purified water will be let into the Pulicot back waters. The letting of the purified water will be of the standard of the Pollution Control Board of Tamil Nadu.
6. In that meeting, the 4th respondent requested that during the construction of bunds, sprinkling of water shall be done so as to avoid nuisance to the adjoining salt works. This has been agreed to by the Board. Regarding the construction of ash bund, the 4th respondent requested for providing necessary draining works for the flood waters, which otherwise, will head-up and damage the salt works on the northern side of the ash dyke. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, indicated that this has been taken care of already and the Public Works Department has been addressed to de-touring the existing waterways and also catchment water-cum- storm water drain has been proposed along the outer periphery of the ash bund, which will be suitably designed to drain the entire water accumulating at the western side of the bund and properly let into the Pulicot back waters.
7. During the discussions, the 4th respondent requested that minimum level of Ennore Creek and Back waters may be maintained for movement of boat traffic for salt transport and also for the drawal of brine for the salt manufacture. Added to that, he has suggested that the coolant water for NMTPP can be drawn direct from the sea and let back into the Pulicot back waters on the northern side. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, has informed that the designs have been approved for Stage I and the works are in an advanced stage, and as such, no modification is feasible at that stage. The subject was deferred as the same can be considered for adoption in Stage II.
8. It was agreed in that meeting that the Ennore Sand Bar is expected to be maintained so that the bar could be kept open always by using number of dredgers probably from January, 1993, which would come into operation, so that the minimum level of sea water will be maintained. For this proposal, the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, pointed out that keeping the Ennore bar open and maintaining certain minimum level in the back waters is essential for the survival of the power plant?. Both parties have agreed to undertake a survey and all boundaries demarcated properly for the salt lands proposed to (sic) over to the Board for various purposes such as permanent road, railway siding, ash dyke, etc. They have also agreed that necessary action will be taken to start the survey work by 2.9.1992.
9. Regarding arranging and shifting of survey stones on the east of Athipattu Thillai Road, it was agreed in the meeting that the same will be attended to immediately. The 4th respondent requested for forming of road and ash slurry pipe line without hindrance to the existing Athipattu Thillai Road, which has been agreed to as the road will be formed about 2 metres above the ground level and necessary slopes can be given to avoid any obstruction to the road traffic for salt movement. In that meeting, the 4th respondent said that some high density brine is expected while excavating within the ash dyke as well as borrow area within the ash dyke and suggested that this water could be better utilised for manufacturing of salt since the same cannot be used for construction purposes or will have to be wasted otherwise. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, indicated that the Salt Department lessees will arrange to lay necessary pipe lines and bear the cost for leading such brine to their fields.
10. In that meeting, the 4th respondent suggested that necessary water ways are to be provided by means of box culverts or hume pipe culverts in the ash slurry pipe line embarkment so as to provide uninterrupted brine supply to the salt works, which are bifurcated due to laying of ash slurry pipe line embankment. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, agreed that necessary metre hume pipe culverts will be provided at suitable places in consultation with the lessees and Salt Department to suit their requirements during construction. The minutes of discussion was signed by the Chief Engineer, NMTPP and the Deputy Salt Commissioner.
11. From the above minutes it is seen that the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, and other officials of the project have given several assurances for safeguarding the interests of the salt manufacturers. However, in view of the provision in the project for the creation of a separate dumping ground for the ash generated in the project and conveying it in the form of a slurry through pipe lines, neither the Salt Department nor the salt manufacturers anticipated any pollution on this account.
12. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of discussion held on 26.8.1992, it was considered as a prime and essential object by all the authorities concerned, which had also reflected in the discussions, to see that the said project is viably executed without affecting the rights of the lessees and licencees who are in occupation of the lands in that area for salt manufacture over an extent of 5,000 acres in a lawful manner. It is pertinent to notice that the salt manufacturers are using the Pulicot river back waters and the Buckingham Canal for time immemorial for salt manufacture as well as boat traffic to lift the salt manufactured in those lands to the storing points, toll gate, etc., It is also submitted that the back waters in Pulicot and the Buckingham Canal alone are used for manufacture of salt in a lawful manner since the ground water is not having adequate and required degree of salinity for the salt manufacture. In such indefeasible and indisputable factual and geographical circumstances of compelling nature, respondents 1 and 2 had specifically agreed to protect the salt factory lands in the entire area in and around Athipattu village, and also agreed to lay separate pipe line for ash slurry in consultation with the lessees and the Salt Department in the meeting held on 26.8.1992. In the said meeting and also by subsequent conducts, respondents 1 and 2 assured to take all measures to prevent the pollution effectively in and around that area and more particularly in the salt factory lands over an extent of 5,000 acres.
13. It is the grievance of the petitioner that even though respondents 1 and 2 have agreed as above, they have not taken any effective steps to control pollution in that area. In spite of the repeated representations from the salt manufacturers, villagers and the Salt Department, respondents 1 and 2 continue to discharge the ash slurry into the Salt Department lands adjoining the Buckingham Canal at Athipattu village in an unauthorised manner. It is submitted that the pollution caused by the ash slurry in Pulicot lake water renders the water unfit for salt manufacture thereby affecting the salt manufacturing industry over the entire Athipattu South, North and salt factory areas and now affected the Vallur Salt Factory near Ennore also. The representations of the salt manufacturers, villagers, labourers and also the 4th respondent to respondents 1 and 2 did not bring out any fruitful result. On the other hand, the Board authorities are still continuing with their illegal and unauthorised activities of discharging the ash slurry into the Salt Department lands meant for salt manufacture. It is submitted that the storage of fly ash and fly ash slurry is causing havoc in the day-to-day life of the entire people in that locality. The improper planning of respondents 1 and 2 has not only affected the natural atmosphere but also causing severe pollution in the water, air and soil condition. Further, due to the impact of discharge of the ash slurry by respondents 1 and 2, the fishes in the entire back waters in the said area die in large quantity, resulting in huge loss to all concerned. Because of illegal discharge of ash slurry into Pulicot and Buckingham Canal back waters, the natural wealth such as fish, barnacles and other mineral resources already available in the saline water have totally disappeared and the water became blackish and totally unfit for salt manufacture.
14. The petitioner would submit that because of the unauthorised and arbitrary activities of respondents 1 and 2, the salt manufacturing process has come to a standstill in over 4,000 acres in the North Madras belt areas abutting the Bay of Bengal. This tragic and deplorable condition is well known to respondents 1 and 2 and even then, they do not care to take any effective steps till date to prevent the pollution. In fact, the Salt Department has taken all efforts and pains and repeatedly represented and appraised of the real condition of the Salt Department lands to respondents 1 and 2, the last two communications sent on 7.2.1996 and 28.2.1996. However, respondents 1 and 2 are not heeding to any such genuine representations and are not interested in solving the human as well as trade oriented problems.
15. According to the petitioner, certain salt manufacturers-cum-licencees have caused a legal notice to be sent on 10.2.1996 to respondents 1 and 2, to which also there was no response or action on the side of respondents 1 and 2. The petitioner also had sent a telegram to the respondents on 26.2.1996. Since respondents 1 and 2 have failed to honour their commitments, the petitioner- association was compelled to approach this Court for redressal of their genuine grievance, as the members of the petitioner- association had been guaranteed with the right to life, right to carry on their lawful trade, commerce and avocation, etc. Since their constitutional rights have been interfered with in an unquestionable manner under the guise of discharging the ash slurry into the back waters of the salt lands belonging to the Salt Department in the possession and enjoyment of the members of the petitioner- association, the entire salt manufacturing operation is paralysed.
16. The writ petition was admitted by this Court on 15.3.1996 and notice was ordered to all respondents. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a counter-affidavit dated 10.4.1996 signed by Mr. K. Veluchami, Chief Engineer, NMTPP, denying the allegations made in the writ petition. Mr. A.P. Muthuswami, Chairman of the Board, has also filed an additional counter-affidavit dated 15.4.1996, denying the allegations of the petitioner. The 3rd respondent/Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board filed a separate counter-affidavit sworn to by its Member Secretary Mr. G. Rengaswami and also in inspection report dated 12.4.1996. A separate counter-affidavit was filed by the 4th respondent/Salt Department sworn to by the Deputy Salt Commissioner.
17. On behalf of the petitioner, arguments were advanced by Mr. B. Santhakumar. Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, though defended the action of respondents 1 and 2, however, submitted that the Board will take immediate steps to prevent any further damage to the lands in question.
18. Mr. N.R. Chandran, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the 3rd respondent, submitted that the Board has not followed the conditions mentioned in the consent letter dated 12.8.1992 and also the other conditions - vide the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 7.12.1993. It is also submitted that the ash slurry mixes with the back waters of Pulicot lake, which is s source to all salt manufacturing industries, thereby causing deposition of fly ash in the salt pans. It is further submitted that during inspection of the said area on 26.2.1996 by the District Environmental Engineer of the 3rd respondent, it was noticed that the ash slurry was discharged on nearby lands instead of discharging the same into ash dykes. Therefore, respondents 1 and 2 were by letter dated 8.3.1996 asked to stop forthwith the discharge of fly ash slurry outside the premises and the expedite the pipe line work for conveying the ash slurry to ash dyke and to comply with the conditions imposed by the 3rd respondent. He has also pointed out the observations made by the 3rd respondent during inspection of the unit on 12.4.1996.
19. Mr. K.R. Thiagarajan, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, appearing for the 4th respondent, has pointed out that a large part of the land had not only been rendered unfit for salt manufacture by such dumping of the ash slurry but the saline waters on the adjoining Buckingham Canal were also being polluted making it unfit for salt production. It is further pointed out that the NMTPP authorities had not obtained the permission of the Salt Department for such dumping. Therefore, the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, was asked to stop such dumping not only for the reasons (sic) in the counter-affidavit but also due to the fact that the entire land under Licence No. 10 and measuring about 180 acres was covered by a stay order granted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.M.P. No. 19230 of 1992, on account of which, even the Salt Department, as the owner, could not interfere with the land. The 4th respondent has also requested the Member (Generation) of the Board by letter dated 7.2.1996, to instruct the NMTPP authorities to stop pumping ash slurry in salt pan areas, back waters and Buckingham Canal and also arrange for the removal of the ash already dumped in the holdings of Licence No. 10. As there was no response, a reminder was issued to the Member (Generation) of the Board on 28.2.1996. The Salt Factory Officer, Athipattu South, took up the matter personally with the Superintending Engineer, NMTPP at site. However, the NMTPP authorities continued to pump ash slurry into the salt pan acres as if to contain pollution and constructed an eastern bund around the area. The Salt Factory Officer, Athipattu South further reported on 11.3.1996 that the NMTPP authorities were pumping ash slurry into the Pulicot river, which not only results in the silting up of the river in places but also rendering the saline water of the river unfit for salt production. He further submits that this Court may direct the NMTPP authorities and the Board to stop forthwith discharging or dumping the ash slurry into the salt pan lands or into the Pulicot river back waters and Buckingham Canal. He also prays that a direction may be given to the NMTPP authorities and the Board to remove the ash already dumped in the salt pan lands over which they have no legal access and to clear the ash dumped into the Pulicot river and render the lands to their original shape and make the Pulicot river flowing again.
20. It is useful and pertinent to extract certain portions from the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent in order to appreciate as to how the NMTPP authorities and the Board have violated the consent given by the Board under the Water (P & C.P.) Act, 1974, and the Air (P & C.P) Act, 1981, and the consent issued under the Water and Air Acts by proceedings dated 7.12.1993.
Consent was issued to the said unit under Water (P & C.P) Act, 1974, subject to the following conditions among other conditions - vide this office proceedings dated 7.12.1993:
(i) All efforts may be made to collect the ash from the furnace in the form of granules instead of sending it to crusher for pulverising and dumping it along with ash;
(ii) Care should be exercised over the possibility of leaching of trade metals from the ash dump. The ash dump area should be made impervious so that the ground water is not polluted due to water seepage;
(iii) The unit shall construct ash dykes and settling ponds for disposal of fly ash slurry and the superintendent shall satisfy the standards prescribed by the Board.
(iv) The ash pond effluent shall be recirculated totally.
The unit was commissioned during December, 1995. Complaint was made by the Secretary, South India Salt Manufacturers Association against this unit stating that due to the disposal of ash slurry, nearly 5,000 acres of salt manufacturing land in that area has been affected. It has also been reported that the ash slurry mixes with the backwaters of Pulicot lake, which is a source to all salt manufacturing industries, thereby causing deposition of fly ash in the salt pans. Also he added that they are not able to get required quantity of brine from the back waters because of ash disposal.
During inspection of the said area on 26.2.1996 by the District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Ambattur, it was noticed that the ash slurry was discharged on nearby lands instead of discharging the same into ash dykes.
Hence, this respondent, by letter dated 8.3.1996, addressed the unit to stop forthwith the discharge of fly ash slurry outside the premises and to expedite the pipe line works for conveying the ash slurry to ash dyke and to comply with the conditions imposed by the Board.
In the concluding portion of the counter-affidavit it is stated by the 3rd respondent that during inspection, the unit was instructed to completely stop the pumping of ash slurry into the adjacent land and to complete and commission the remaining pipe lines for the disposal of entire quantity of ash slurry into the ash dykes.
21. As already seen, the area in question was inspected by the Joint Chief Environmental Engineer, Madras Region and CMN District on 12.4.1996. It is seen from the report submitted that during inspection of the NMTPP, all the three units were generating 514 MW of power and that the ash slurry generated from the Thermal Power Plant has been pumped outside the thermal plant to the waste salt pan development area. It was also noticed that large accumulation of ash slurry on the waste salt land adjacent to the thermal plant. It was further noticed that the present ash slurry pumping area is located in between the Buckingham Canal and the back waters. After the inspection was over, the power plant had been instructed to follow the conditions given below:
(a) To completely stop discharging the ash slurry into the adjacent land and to pump all the ash slurry to the ash dyke area.
(b) Complete and commission the remaining pipe lines to the ash dyke immediately.
(c) Implement treatment system for the boiler blow down and canteen waste.
(d) Improve and contain the fugitive coal dust emission from moving of trucks as well as handling of coal by stackers.
(e) To dredge completely the ash deposition in the back waters.
(f) To implement sewage treatment plant for the sewage and utilise the treated sewage for gardening.
(g) To plant more trees along ash dyke area and also in and around the plant premises.
(h) To provide Ambient Air Quality Station near the coal handling area to assess the coal dust emission.
(i) To stop the unauthorised outlets into the Buckingham Canal.
22. Though respondents 1 and 2 have filed a counter-affidavit justifying their action, however, they admitted that the dumping of ash slurry on idle waste lands of salt departments was resorted to only as a temporary measure. It is contended that there was no salt production in that area as observed from the starting of the project work, i.e., from 1989 onwards till date. The above submission is totally incorrect in view of the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, who are the owners of the land and who leased out the same to the members of the petitioner association. There is no dispute that respondents 1 and 2 have agreed to strictly abide by the minutes of the discussion held on 26.8.1992 between the Board and the 4th respondent. However, the Board would say that dumping is being done as a temporary measure in the idle saltpan lands of around 60 acres, which is incorrect in view of the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent. According to the 4th respondent, 126 units are manufacturing salt in an area of 4,818.95 acres. However, it is stated in the counter-affidavit of respondents 1 and 2 that the works of connecting bund between ash dyke and plant compound including the bridges across Buckingham Canal and back waters are completed and that the work of laying of pipe lines on the bund is nearing completion. They would further submit that already one line is made through and the other two lines will be ready within one month (originally typed as a fortnight and scored out and substituted by the words one month). After check up and test commissioning within another month (wherein also the words a fortnight has been scored and another month has been substituted), the present ad hoc arrangement of temporary dumping will be discontinued.
23. It is stated in paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit, that the Board being a statutory organisation responsible and accountable to its functions and obligations, it has not at all deviated from its commitments made in the meeting held on 26.8.1992 at the instance of the 4th respondent and that all the works, as agreed to in the meeting and as contemplated in the system of network, are being scrupulously followed till date and continue to maintain at all costs. We have already seen that the above statement made in the counter-affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 2 is absolutely incorrect and that they have violated the commitment given by them on 26.8.1992, as could be seen from the counter-affidavits filed by respondents 3 and 4.
24. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, has also in his counter-affidavit, had the audacity to say that the question of pollution to the natural atmosphere and natural wealth does not arise at all that the temporary storage of ash slurry in an isolated idle area does not in any way cause havoc in the day to-day life of the local people. The Chief Engineer, NMTPP, though stated that the pumping of ash slurry was resorted to only as a temporary measure; has however, stated, that the Board intends to commission the regular delivery system to lead the ash slurry into the ash dump area within two months and all efforts are put in by the Board towards this effect on a war footing.
25. In paragraph 22 of the counter-affidavit, the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, has stated as follows:
I respectfully submit that the pipe lines outside the plant compound are taken on a graded ground, over an embankment formed for the purpose and the pipe lines covered for a distance of around 6.500 KM from the Power House. The cost of laying of the pipe lines including forming of embankment, bridges across B. Canal and back waters, and allied works, etc. is about Rs. 60 crores. The respondents have already completed the laying of the three pipe lines covering the entire stretch, but certain finishing works are yet to be completed in respect of two pipe lines, which includes crossing of railway track, for which the necessary permission and line clearance for traction have to be obtained from Railway authorities; The TNEB has already spent around Rs. 50 crores in laying the pipes and for completing the formation of embankment, and for construction of the bridges and culverts, etc. The respondents have taken all efforts to complete the entire work within a period of two months. When once the laying of pipe lines is completed, the respondents will be discharging the ash slurry into the ash dump pond, provided for the purpose. As a matter of fact, one of the pipe lines is already discharging into the main pond from the last week of March, 1996. There is no basis for the apprehension of the petitioner that the ash slurry is polluting the back waters, or the biological or salt conditions.
26. As I was not impressed with the counter-affidavit filed by the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, I directed the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Board to file a counter-affidavit through its Chairman. Accordingly, an additional affidavit was filed by Mr. A.P. Muthuswami, Chairman of the Board. In paragraph 5 of the additional affidavit it is stated as follows:
I submit that now two pipe lines have been completed out of which one is already discharging the ash slurry into the ash dyke from the last week of 3/96. Certain finishing works in respect of third pipe line are to be completed which includes crossing of railway track for which necessary permission and line clearance for traction are to be obtained from Railway Authority. Hence the above balance work including the check up and test commissioning will be completed within a period of eight weeks. When once the laying of third pipe line is completed, the respondent will be discharging ash slurry into the ash dyke pond which has already been constructed in the land allotted to us and hence the whole system is devoid of pollution problem.
27. In paragraph 8 of the additional affidavit, the Chairman of the Board has stated as follows:
I submit that the erection of pumps in ash water recovery pump house is being made ready on war footing and will be able to operate as soon as the ash settles in the ponds and clear water collected in the secondary pond for pumping back through pipes over the embankment to inside pump house for re-cycling purpose and there will not be any discharge of this water in the salt land.
28. At the time of hearing, it was argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that since the dumping of ash slurry on the lands held by the members of the petitioner- association is admitted, respondents I and 2 should be forthwith restrained from dumping, any further ash slurry on the lands in question. It was also suggested that Unit Nos. 1 and 2 are using coal as the raw material while Unit No. 3 is using only oil for manufacture of electricity and therefore, respondents 1 and 2 should be directed to use the oil alone which will stop the dumping of ash slurry. It is argued on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 that the use of oil to run Unit No. 3 is a costly option and that the optimum capacity of the unit could be achieved only by coal fire, which is also very much cheaper when compared to oil firing and hence this option not only to avail the huge savings in public money but also to feed the power grid with the maximum power output so as to balance the ever increasing demand.
29. I see much force in the contention of Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. In the additional affidavit filed by the Chairman of the Board, he has clearly stated that two pipe lines have been completed, out of which one is already discharging the ash slurry into the ash dyke from the last week of March, 1996 and that certain finishing works in respect of the third pipe line are to be completed, which includes crossing of railway track, for which necessary permission and line clearance for traction are to be obtained from Railway Authority, and therefore, the balance work including the check up and test commissioning will be completed within a period of eight weeks. He also stated that when once the laying of third pipe line is completed, the Board will be discharging ash slurry into the ash dyke pond which has already been constructed in the land allotted to them and hence the whole system is devoid of pollution problem.
30. The learned Counsel for the petitioner objected to the grant of eight weeks' time, pointing out the counter-affidavit filed by the Chief Engineer, NMTPP, wherein he only asked for a month's time. I am of the view, that the grant of eight weeks' time is on the high side. To the suggestion made by the court that the Board at least can now switch on to the use of oil till the completion of the work, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Board, after discussion with the officials present in court, agreed to complete the balance work in all respects on a war footing within a period of three weeks. The undertaking given by the learned Senior Counsel Mr. A.L. Somayaji in court is recorded. Respondents 1 and 2, shall, therefore, complete the pending balance work in all respects within three weeks from to-day positively. Respondents 1 and 2 shall not discharge the ash slurry into the salt lands in the North Madras Belt, viz., Athipattu South, Athipattu North, Thillai and Vallur Salt Factory areas and also in the back waters of Pulicot lake and Buckingham Canal, on the expiry of three weeks' time now granted. The work should be done by the respondents 1 and 2 on a war footing. The respondents shall also remove the ashes already dumped in the salt pan lands and also clear the ashes dumped in the Pulicot river within three weeks from today as undertaken by them. Further, respondents 1 and 2 shall adhere to the instructions viz., Instruction Nos. 1 to 9 given in the inspection report of the Joint Chief Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, dated 12.4.1996. I make it clear that after the expiry of the three weeks time now granted, respondents 1 and 2 should discharge the slurry ash only in the dyke.
31. The problem of environmental pollution is a social problem affecting, as it does, the society at large. The transformation from the a laissez faire societies to the socialistic pattern of societies imposes a number of obligations on the State and the State is saddled with heavy responsibility of eradication of social hazards and social evils and ensurance of social justice to every citizen of the country and it cannot be gainsaid that the solution of the problems regarding environmental pollution is one of the most important social problems that a nation is called upon to face. The developed countries of the world have had to meet this challenge for some time past and necessary legislations were passed by them to prevent and control the problem from time to time.
32. Article 48-A of the Constitution casts a duty on the State to endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country. Article 51-A of the Constitution specifically deals with the fundamental duties of every citizen to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions. It also provides that it shall be the duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment including forest, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures.
33. It is in this context that a three day workshop on 'ash ponds and ash disposal systems' held at New Delhi recently assumes importance. The aim of that programme organised by the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, in association with the Fly Ash Mission of the Technology Information, Fore-casting and Assessment Council under the Union Department of Science and Technology, is to disseminate information on state-of-the-art technologies and facilitate exchange of field-level experiences. In all, about 150 scientists, engineers and Ors. engaged in the management of the ash ponds and disposal systems, participated in the workshop. With the number of coal-based thermal power stations in different parts of the country increasing, the problem of disposal of 'fly ash' generated as a waste by them is also assuming gigantic proportions. It is estimated that about 100 million tonnes of fly ash would be produced a year by the end of the century, posing a major threat to environmental safety. A finely divided residue resulting from the combustion of coal, with the particles size ranging from as much as 120 microns to less than 5 micron in diameter, the fly ash is so light that it gets air-borne very fast and pollute the atmosphere. While in human beings, continuous inhalation of the generally gray coloured, and abrasive and acidic particles can cause silicosis, fibrosis of lungs, bronchitis and pneumonitis, its deposition may affect horticulture and its disposal into sea, rivers and other water bodies damage the aquatic life cycles. It can also corrode surfaces of structures. It has been calculated that the existing 75 thermal power stations alone need about 50,000 acres of precious land for disposal of the fly ash during their life span of 30 years and that the annual expenditure on road transportation merely for dumping it came to about Rs. 50 crores.
34. Environmental pollution now constitutes one of the biggest hazards. It is the biggest hazard not only to human existence but also to the existence of all the gifts that nature has so kindly bestowed on mankind. Heavy industrialisation and ever-increasing urbanisation have resulted in the problem assuming staggering proportions. Unless immediate and urgent steps are taken to put a stop to the environmental pollution, a very bleak and terrible future awaits the humanity.
35. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed as indicated above viz., respondents 1 and 2 shall complete all the pending balance work in all respects within three weeks from to-day positively. They shall also remove the ashes already dumped in the salt pan lands belonging to the Salt Department, and also clear the ashes dumped in the Pulicot river within three weeks from to-day and that thereafter, they shall not discharge the ash slurry into the salt lands in the North Madras Belt Areas and also in the back waters of Pulicot lake and in the Buckingham Canal. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P. No. 4912 of 1996 is dismissed as no longer necessary.