Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manoj Kumar And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 3 October, 2016
Author: S.S. Saron
Bench: S.S. Saron, Lisa Gill
(113) CWP No. 20549 of 2016 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 20549 of 2016 (O&M)
Date of decision: 03.10.2016.
Manoj Kumar and others ..... Petitioners.
Versus
State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
Present: Mr. D.S. Bali, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. A.K. Chopra, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate, for the caveator/respondent No.6.
*****
S.S. SARON, J.
Petitioners No.1 to 4 are residents of village Kishangarh, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak and petitioner No.5 is a resident of Goyat Pana, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak. They seek an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for directing respondents No.1 to 5 for taking immediate legal action against M/s Mittal Agro Oil Industries, village Kishangarh, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak through its owner Vijay Kumar (respondent No.6).
According to the petitioners, M/s Mittal Agro Oil Industries, village Kishangarh, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak (respondent No.6) is generating air as well as water pollution of highest level in the local area which is dangerous to human as well as animal life; besides, it is polluting 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-10-2016 00:20:39 ::: (113) CWP No. 20549 of 2016 (O&M) -2- the environment, atmosphere and ecology of the area.
Mr. A.K. Chopra, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate appearing for the caveator/respondent No.6 submits that M/s Mittal Agro Oil Industries, village Kishangarh, Tehsil Meham, District Rohtak (respondent No.6) has been functioning under the present name since 1989. Earlier, it was functioning as M/s Mittal Cotton Oil Mills. Now, a refinery plant is sought to be added from 2015. It is submitted that 'consent to establish' a refinery plant was granted by the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (respondent No.2) on 28.12.2015, which was revised on 31.08.2016. At present, the 'consent to operate' is pending with the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (respondent No. 2). A show-cause notice for refusal of consent to operate under Section 25/26 of the Water Act, 1974; Section 21/22 of the Air Act, 1981 and Authorization under the Hazardous and other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 has been issued on 16.09.2016.
It is submitted that necessary reply to the said show-cause notice has been given on 22.09.2016 which is pending consideration with the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (respondent No.2).
Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate, on instructions from Mr. Vijay Kumar Mittal, who is present in Court, states that the refinery plant will not be operated till the necessary 'consent to operate' is given by the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (respondent No.2) and even the trials will not be conducted.
In view of the said statement and position, the writ petition is disposed of at this stage without going into merits of the case inter se the 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-10-2016 00:20:40 ::: (113) CWP No. 20549 of 2016 (O&M) -3- parties so as to enable the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (respondent No.2) to take a decision on the 'consent to operate' application of respondent No. 6 pending before it.
(S.S. SARON) JUDGE (LISA GILL) JUDGE 03.10.2016 Ramesh Note: 1. Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes
2. Whether reportable : No 3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 08-10-2016 00:20:40 :::