Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M/S.Performance Products And Services vs The District Collector on 5 March, 2025

Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

    2025:MHC:655



                                                                                          W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                       DATED: 05.03.2025

                                                               CORAM:

                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                            W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025
                                                         and
                          W.M.P.Nos. 6942, 6944, 6946, 6947, 6953, 6954, 6956 & 6958 of 2025

                     W.P.No. 6304 of 2025

                     M/S.PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES,
                     A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
                     MR.R.PRADEEP KUMAR,
                     HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AT
                     NEW NO.2/132, OLD NO.2/116,
                     SENNEERKUPPAM,
                     CHENNAI NEW BYPASS,
                     TIRUVALLUR-600 056.
                     ALSO LOCATED AT
                     S.F.NO. 96/2B, 96/2C, KABILAKURICHI VILLAGE,
                     PARAMATHI VELUR TALUK,
                     NAMAKKAL DISTRICT,
                     TAMILNADU-637 204.                                  ... Petitioner

                                                                     Vs

                     1.           THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                                  NAMAKKAL DISTRICT,
                                  NAMAKKAL.

                     2.           THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE TALUK,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT

                     3.           THE TAHSILDAR,
                                  PARAMATHI VELUR TALUK OFFICE,

                     1/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                 ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm )
                                                                                            W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

                                  PADAMUDIPALAYAM,
                                  NAMAKKAL-638 182.

                     4.           R.PONNUSAMY

                     5.           THE MEMBER SECRETARY,
                                  TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
                                  MOUNT SALAI,
                                  CHENNAI - 600 032.
                                  (R5-SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER
                                  ORDER DATED 25.02.2025
                                  IN WP.6304/2025 BY DBCJ)                                            ... Respondents

                     Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the
                     issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents No.1 to 3 from
                     proceedings with or adjudicating the peace committee proceedings in
                     Na.Ka.No.6217/2024/C dated 27.10.2024 on the file of the second
                     respondent.
                                       For Petitioner              : Mr.Sricharan Rangarajan
                                                                     Senior Counsel
                                                                     Assisted by Mr.K.Gowtham Kumar

                                       For R1 to R3                : Dr.S.Suriya
                                                                     Additional Government Pleader

                                       For R4                     : Mr.V.Gunasekar
                                                                   Standing Counsel

                     W.P.No. 6317 of 2025

                     M/S.PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES,
                     A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
                     MR.R.PRADEEP KUMAR,
                     HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AT
                     NEW NO.2/132, OLD NO.2/116,
                     SENNEERKUPPAM,

                     2/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                   ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm )
                                                                                           W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

                     CHENNAI NEW BYPASS,
                     TIRUVALLUR-600 056.
                     ALSO LOCATED AT
                     S.F.NO. 96/2B, 96/2C, KABILAKURICHI VILLAGE,
                     PARAMATHI VELUR TALUK,
                     NAMAKKAL DISTRICT,
                     TAMILNADU-637 204.                                                                ... Petitioner

                                                                      Vs

                     1.           THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                                  NAMAKKAL DISTRICT,
                                  NAMAKKAL.

                     2.           THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE TALUK,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT

                     3.           THE TAHSILDAR,
                                  PARAMATHI VELUR TALUK OFFICE,
                                  PADAMUDIPALAYAM,
                                  NAMAKKAL-638 182.

                     4.           THE ASSISTANT / JUNIOR ENGINEER,
                                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,
                                  TAMIL NADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
                                       CORPORATION LTD (TANGEDCO),
                                  KABILARMALAI (PO), PARAMATHI VELUR- 637 204.

                     5.           R.PONNUSAMY

                     5.           THE MEMBER SECRETARY,
                                  TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
                                  MOUNT SALAI,
                                  CHENNAI - 600 032.
                                  (R6-SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER
                                  ORDER DATED 25.02.2025
                                  IN WP.6317/2025 BY DBCJ)                                    ... Respondents




                     3/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                  ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm )
                                                                                             W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

                     Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the
                     issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for entire records
                     pertaining to the proceeding in Na.Ka.No.6217/2024/C dated 27.10.2024 on
                     the file of the second respondent herein, quash the same and forbear the
                     respondents No. 1, 2, 3 from interfering with the petitioner to conduct their
                     occupation and business at S.F.No.96/2B, 96/2C, Kabilakurichi Village,
                     Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District with an extent of 4.3 acres without
                     any intervention and hindrances.


                                        For Petitioner              : Mr.Sricharan Rangarajan
                                                                      Senior Counsel
                                                                      Assisted by Mr.K.Gowtham Kumar

                                        For R1 to R3                : Dr.S.Suriya
                                                                      Additional Government Pleader

                                        For R4                     : Mr.S.Kalaiselvan (TANGEDCO)

                                        For R6                     : Mr.V.Gunasekar
                                                                     Standing Counsel


                                                         COMMON ORDER

The prayer in W.P.No. 6304 of 2025 is to forbear the respondents No.1 to 3 from proceeding with or adjudicating the peace committee proceedings in Na.Ka.No.6217/2024/C dated 27.10.2024 on the file of the second respondent.

4/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

2. The prayer in W.P.No. 6317 of 2025 is to call for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.6217/2024/C dated 27.10.2024 on the file of the second respondent, quash the same and forbear respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3 from interfering with the petitioner in conducting their occupation and business at S.F.No.96/2B, 96/2C, Kabilakurichi Village, ParamathiVelur Taluk, Namakkal District, covering an area of 4.3 acres without any intervention or hindrances.

3. Heard Mr.Sricharan R an g a r aj an , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Dr.S. S uriya , the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, Mr.S.K alais elv an , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of TANGEDCO and Mr.V. G u n a s e k a r , the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.

4. The case of the writ petitioner is that the petitioner is a partnership firm. It purchased the land with buildings in S.F. No. 96/2B, 96/2C, Kabilakurichi Village, Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District. A pre- 5/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 existing coir factory was located on the premises. The petitioner acquired the property to establish a jaggery production factory. It is stated that the petitioner has taken all possible steps to comply with the statutory rules and regulations currently in force. The petitioner has initiated the process of setting up a jaggery production unit by seeking the necessary permissions from various authorities. The petitioner has obtained the following approvals from different authorities:-

S.No. Date Approval/Permissions The Petitioner had obtained Registration Certificate No. 1 09.02.2024 33AAIFP2825Q1ZU under Goods and Services Act – FORM GST REG – 06 for the factory in the scheduled premises Name Transfer Order Copy obtained from TANGEDCO to the 2 16.03.2024 Petitioner firm’s name for the purposes of obtaining Electricity in respect of scheduled premises.

Registration with the MSME Council for the purpose of 3 27.04.2024 registering the Petitioner's firm as a Medium Enterprise engaged in the business of manufacturing of Jaggery.

The petitioner had obtained from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board Consent to Establish Certificate provided to the 4 24.05.2024 Petitioner firm for establishing a jaggery production factory in the|scheduled premises.

The petitioner had applied for planning permission before the 5 10.06.2024 Directorate of Town and Country Planning and an acknowledgement receipt was provided by the authorities. The Petitioner had obtained a Certificate of approval issued by the Deputy Directorate of Industrial Safety and Health, Salem 6 22.07.2024 for the installation of' buildings and machinery in factory in the scheduled premises.

The petitioner had obtained a provisional order Certificate of 7 12.08.2024 boiler / economiser registration No. TN182024094103 for the scheduled premises.

6/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 The petitioner had obtained a no objection certificate in 8 21.08.2024 K.Dis.No.8146/A/2024 – permission certificate issued by the fire & rescue and Disaster Management department. The Petitioner has obtained the requisite licenses issued by the 9 28.08.2024 ministry of food safety and public standard authority certificate No. 12424998000190 (FSSAI).

10 2023-2024 The Petitioner has paid property taxes.

5. The petitioner states that it was taken aback to discover certain individuals with ulterior motives lodging frivolous objections to the establishment of the jaggery production factory. No complaints were received from any person before 25.10.2024. However, between 25.10.2024 and 27.10.2024, these individuals disrupted operations at the scheduled premises by creating nuisances at the entrance and falsely accusing the petitioner of environmental pollution and operating without the required permissions. The petitioner was only conducting operations on a trial basis and had not yet opened the factory for commercial use. Meanwhile, the Inspector of Police forwarded a complaint, and the second respondent issued a summons on 27.10.2024 to appear for a Peace Committee meeting on 28.10.2024.

6. Furthermore, the second respondent called for a field inspection 7/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 report, and a team of 15 different officials was formed for the inspection. The notice lacked any legal sanctity. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued on 27.10.2024, detailing several allegations and observations made during the field inspection. The petitioner received the show cause notice only on 04.11.2024. On the same day, the second respondent issued proceedings to disconnect the electricity supply provided to the petitioner via EB connection No. 04-238-005-3660. This action was taken in violation of the principles of natural justice. After the Peace Committee meeting, it was unilaterally decided by the second respondent and the other authorities that the unit would be locked, and the keys to the premises would be handed over to the Tahsildar, Paramathi Velur. Accordingly, the second respondent also secured the premises under lock and key. The District Environmental Engineer, who had previously granted consent to establish the unit, issued a show cause notice dated 25.10.2024, stating that the petitioner had commenced operations without obtaining consent to operate. The operations were conducted only on a trial basis, and the effluent treatment plant was not operational as the factory had yet to become fully functional. The petitioner has undertaken that operations will commence only after obtaining consent to 8/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 operate from the Pollution Control Board, and the effluent treatment plant will be used continuously and efficiently. Additionally, the petitioner will provide a zero liquid discharge system in the unit before the commencement of production. The sewage generated from the unit will be treated and disposed of solely through septic tank and soaking pit arrangements. The petitioner will also provide an elevated solar evaporation plan before production begins. The petitioner will ensure that the bagasse is stored in the closed shed provided within the unit and will not be stored outside the premises. Despite these measures, no action has been taken, and the matter has remained stagnant. It is under these circumstances that the writ petitions were filed.

7. When the writ petition was heard, a status report was submitted on behalf of the Revenue Divisional Officer. The Revenue Divisional Officer stated that a law and order situation arose due to allegations of discharging effluents into a nearby water body and onto the private lands of other farmers. Under these circumstances, during the joint inspection, several shortcomings were identified. These shortcomings are detailed in paragraph No. 10 of the 9/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 status report, which is extracted below:

“Ba s e d on report rec eiv e d fro m the variou s D e p a rt m e n t, it wa s found that Perf or m a n c e Produ ct s and S er vic e s fact ory wa s op e n e d and running without the follo wing Licen s e' s: -
(i) T w o bore w e lls w er e us e d and 6 0 0 0 liters of Gr o un d W a t e r w er e us e d without rec eiving No obje ction C e rtificat e fro m A D (G e ol o g y ), Gr o un d wat er, Sale m Division.
(ii) Sa nitary C e rtificat e wa s not obtaine d fro m the He alth D e p art m e n t.
(iii) The main building along with offic e Building, S e c urity C a bin, ET P building – Totally 5 Blo ck s wa s being op erat e d without rec eiving D T C P A p pr o v al.
(iv) A c c o r ding to Ta mil Nadu Pan c h a y a t A c t 199 4 Running Licen s e wa s not rec eiv e d fro m con c e r n e d Lo c al Pan ch a y a t Union O f fic e.
(v) C o n s e n t to op erat e wa s not rec eiv e d fro m Ta mil Nadu Pollution C o ntr ol Bo ard and Fact or y wa s op er at e d without per mis sio n and relea s e d the W a s t e W a t e r inside the outsid e the factor y which led to polluting the adja c e nt A griculture land near by wat er bodie s.”

8. Under these circumstances, this Court suo motu impleaded the Member Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and the District Environmental Engineer and requested their report. The report presented to this Court, along with the communication dated 25.02.2025, notes several shortcomings. It further stated that environmental compensation would be determined and that only after the payment of the same would further consent 10/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 to operate be granted. Upon reviewing the submissions, two things were clear to this Court: firstly, that during the operations, which are claimed to be on a trial basis, when the matters escalated to the point of creating a law and order situation, absolutely no action was taken by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board or its authorities. They had granted consent to establish, but they obviously turned a blind eye and didn’t even visit the unit to check if it was operational. It is only under these circumstances that this Court issued an order directing the Member Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to depute two Joint Chief Engineers and a District Environmental Engineer from other jurisdictions to forthwith conduct a detailed inspection and submit a report. Following this, a report has been filed today. The inspection notes the following:

“During the time of insp e ction, follo wing wer e notice d
1. The unit wa s not in op er ation.
2. It wa s asc e rt ain e d that a law - and - ord er issu e arou s e d during the month of O ct o b e r 2 0 2 4 due to the op eration of the unit M/s. Perf or m a n c e Produ ct s and S ervic e s (Jagg e r y Unit), S.F. No s. 9 6 / 2 A , 9 6/ 2 B & 9 6/ 2 C , Kabilakurichi Villag e, Para m a t hi V elur Taluk, Na m a kk al District. To res olv e the law - and - order issu e the R e v e n u e Divisional O f fic e r (Sub Divisional Ex e c u tiv e Ma gistrat e) has organiz e d for a m e e ting am o n g the Division al Le v el C o r e C o m m itt e e M e m b e r s.
3. Ba s e d on the vie w s / opinion off er e d by the m e m b e r s of the 11/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 Divisional Lev el C o r e C o m m itt e e and con sid ering law & ord er situation and be c a u s e of the continuou s prot e s t carried out by local public in Kabilakurichi Villag e, the unit wa s lock e d by the R e v e n u e D e p a rt m e n t.

Further, ord er s w er e issu e d to the T A N G E D C O to disc o n n e c t the po w e r supply to the unit M/s. Perf or m a n c e Produ ct s and S er vic e s (Jagg e r y Unit), S.F. No s. 9 6 / 2 A , 9 6/ 2 B & 9 6/ 2 C , Kabilakurichi Villag e, Para m a t hi V elur Taluk, Na m a kk al District.

4. The unit involve s in the manuf a c t uring of Jagg e r y Po w d e r by crushing sug ar can e by the follo wing proc e s s such as Juice H e ating (9 5 D e gr e e C el siu s) – Clarification by adding Lim e and after obtaining the clear juice it is eva p o r at e d and con c e n tr at e d Jagg e r y Po w e r is pack e d and dispat ch e d.

5. C o n s tru ction of septic tank wa s und er w a y. It wa s report e d by the unit authorities that the so ak pit would be provid e d shortly

6. The unit has provid e d Efflue nt Tre at m e n t Plant (ET P) for the treat m e n t and disp o s al arising fro m the produ ction pro c e s s .

7. The unit has installed Boiler of capa city 3 TP H and fuel for the boiler is bag g a s s e .

8. The unit has provid e d cy clon e sep ar at or and wet scrubb er to control the dust emis si o n fro m the boiler.

9. The solid wa st e gen er at e d fro m the w et scrub bing activity wa s disp o s e d hapha z ar dly.

10. Ther e wa s a hug e quantity of white sugar stor e d in the god o w n and also the unit has stor e d the finish ed produ ct s (Jagg er y po w d e r) and reje ct e d produ ct s in the god o w n.”

9. The report also contains further notes regarding the following violations and shortcomings related to the petitioner industry:- 12/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 “ It is resp e c t f ully submitted, that bas e d on the obs e r v ation mad e during the time of inspe c tion of the unit carried out earlier by the officials of the O/o. D E E, TN P C B , Ku m ar a p al ay a m (6 th R e s p o n d e n t) on 2 5.1 0. 2 0 2 4 , a Sh o w C a u s e Notic e wa s issu e d to the unit for the following violation s notice d there under.
i. During inspe ction, it wa s notic e d that the unit has co m m e n c e d its produ ction activity without obtaining con s e n t to operat e from the TN P C Bo ard.
ii. The unit has provid e d ET P and it wa s found not under operation.
iii. It wa s notice d that the wa st e wat er gen er at e d from the unit’s activities wa s stagn at e d inside the pre mis e s and disch ar g e d on land for ope n perc olation without any treat m e nt.
iv. Al s o, the wa st e wat er wa s discharg e d into nearby pond locat e d in the south ea st side of the unit and has disch ar g e d into G o o s e b e r r y farm locat e d in the north ern side of the unit.
v. The se w a g e gen e r at e d from the labour quarter s is being let into ope n drain which conflu e n c e in the pond locate d in the south e a s t side of the unit.
vi. The unit has not provid e d Elev at e d S olar Ev ap or ation Pan for the dispo s al of trade efflue nt arising from boiler blow do w n.
vii. The solid wa st e s such as mud, dried scu m are found stor e d in the open land without any clos e d she d”.

10. The report also mentions the following conclusions in paragraph No. 8:

13/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 “8. It is resp e c t f ully sub mitte d that the follo wing are submitte d as con clu sio n of the joint inspe ction of the J C E E (M), TN P C B , Sal e m and D E E, TN P C B , Sal e m.
i) Th e land available for the purpo s e of utilization of treat e d trade effluent is locate d outsid e the unit’s pre mis e s and situate d clos e to the vannarkuttai. He n c e, the pos sibility of the efflu ent reaching the nearby Va nn arkuttai cann ot be ruled out.
ii) Th e unit has not provide d Elev at e d Solar Ev ap or ation Pan for the dispo s al of trade efflue nt arising from boiler blo w do w n and hen c e the pos sibility for the unit to dispo s e the boiler blow do w n outsid e the unit’s pre mis e s cann ot be ruled out.
Iii) The unit has provide d by - pas s arrang e m e n t in the ET P colle ction tank and hen c e it is pre su m e d that the unit might hav e dispo s e d the untreat e d trade effluent outside the unit’s pre mi s e s alleg e d by the co m plainants.
iv)Th e S e ptic Tank wa s under con stru ction and hen c e the pos sibility of dispo sin g the se w a g e outsid e of the pre mis e s by the unit cann ot be ruled out.
v) Fro m the Sh o w C a u s e Notic e issu e d by the 6 th R e s p o n d e n t D E E, TN P C B , Ku m ar a p al ay a m it is as c e rt ain e d that the unit had oper at e d the facility without obtaining the C o n s e n t to O p e r at e of the Bo ard”

11. In light of this, this Court rejects the various factual claims made by the petitioner. The officials have determined that it cannot be a trial run. Even a trial run must only be undertaken after consent to operate is granted. Therefore, the petitioner's arguments are untenable. Nevertheless, the unit is locked solely due to a law and order issue. Now that a detailed inspection has 14/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 been conducted by the Pollution Control Board, the further course of action shall proceed in accordance with the law. Only if the petitioner obtains all statutory clearances can the operations commence, if permitted. However, the keys to the premises can be handed over to the petitioner. The disconnection of the electricity supply will be considered to have been executed by the Orders of the Pollution Control Board. After acquiring the necessary licenses and complying with the requirements outlined in the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer regarding groundwater extraction, construction of buildings, etc., the petitioner shall approach the Pollution Control Board for consent to operate. The Pollution Control Board shall conduct another inspection to verify whether the petitioner has met all the requirements as per the consent to establish, including provisions for effluent treatment, the installation of an elevated solar plant, or other facilities mandated by the consent to establish. Thereafter, upon satisfaction, the Pollution Control Board may grant the consent to operate, and only then will the electricity be restored to the petitioner. But this course of action is subject to the action that would be taken on the show cause notice already been issued for violations. It shall be taken to its logical conclusion. Should the allegations be proven, 15/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 appropriate action will be taken, including the collection of compensation or cancellation of the permissions/consent already granted or other measures required by law.

12. In view thereof, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any action of the Pollution Control Board, there exists an appropriate alternative remedy for the petitioner under the relevant statutes. The Member Secretary of the Pollution Control Board shall instruct its subordinate officials that it is their duty to conduct frequent inspections of the unit to ensure that no illegal activities are occurring.

13. It is also noted that a large quantity of sugar is staged on the petitioner’s premises. The learned senior counsel submits that the same was stacked to be added in appropriate proportions as production commences. Regarding the same, the Revenue Divisional Officer is directed to forward a copy of this Order by a communication to the Designated Officer under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 for the authority to inspect the unit and determine the legality of the the action that was done. And if there is any 16/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 violations of the law, further action can be taken.

14. In view thereof, this writ petitions are disposed of on the following terms:-

(i) The keys to the premises shall be handed over to the petitioner. However, the electricity connection shall remain to be disconnected until further orders are passed by the Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board and its authorities.
(ii) The fifth respondent or its subordinates shall proceed further with the show cause notice issued in respect of the petitioner and take appropriate action as per law, which may include all actions permissible under law;
(iii) Mitigation measures for the polluted waterbody or lands shall be carried out if necessary;
(iv) The petitioner can open its premises and carry out all the mandatory requirements and other improvements to make the unit compliant with all lawful measures.
17/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025

(v) The Pollution Control Board shall inspect the unit at least once a week to ensure there are no other production activities by the petitioner and to confirm that the petitioner is solely focused on complying with all statutory regulations;

(vi) If the consent to establish is saved, the consent to operate shall be granted only after thoroughly considering all mandatory requirements and confirming that the petitioner has met all requirements, including the shortcomings pointed out by the Revenue Divisional Officer regarding groundwater extraction, building permission, etc.

(vii) It is unnecessary to mention that even if the petitioner is aggrieved, he can approach the appropriate forum regarding any orders that may be issued in accordance with the law. The petitioner shall not prevent any other authority from conducting inspections to ensure statutory compliance.

(viii) The Revenue Divisional Officer shall issue 18/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 communication to the Designated Authority under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 stated supra for their inspection regarding the usage of Sugar in the process. The Revenue Divisional Officer will also be entitled to carry out the inspection or cause any other appropriate authority to cause an inspection regarding the statutory compliances.

(ix) But for the Revenue Divisional Officer's prompt actions, the inaction of the Pollution Control Board would not have come to light, and the petitioner would have continued its activities without any statutory compliance whatsoever. This Court appreciates the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruchengode. This appreciation shall be recorded in the service records of the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer.

                                        (x)   Consequently,             connected          miscellaneous
                                  petitions are closed. No costs.

                                                                                                        05.03.2025

                     Neutral Citation: Yes

                     nsl

                     To


                     19/21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm )
                                                                                           W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025


                     1.           THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                                  NAMAKKAL DISTRICT,
                                  NAMAKKAL.

                     2.           THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE TALUK,
                                  TIRUCHENGODE, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT

                     3.           THE TAHSILDAR,
                                  PARAMATHI VELUR TALUK OFFICE,
                                  PADAMUDIPALAYAM,
                                  NAMAKKAL-638 182.

                     4.           THE ASSISTANT / JUNIOR ENGINEER,
                                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,
                                  TAMIL NADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
                                       CORPORATION LTD (TANGEDCO),

KABILARMALAI (PO), PARAMATHI VELUR- 637 204.

5. THE MEMBER SECRETARY, TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, MOUNT SALAI, CHENNAI - 600 032.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

nsl 20/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm ) W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 W.P.Nos.6304 & 6317 of 2025 05.03.2025 21/21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2025 02:12:17 pm )