BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI Application No. 85
of 2014 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. A.N. Kandasamy S/o. Nachimuthu Alaganur Magudanchavady Post Sankari Taluk Salem District -637 103
...
Applicant(s)
AND 1.The Chairman Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board 76, Anna Salai Guindy Chennai.600 032.
2.The District Environmental Engineer Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board 1/276, Meyyanur Main Road Salem -636 004
3.The District Collector District Collector Office Salem District
4. The Revenue Divisional Officer Sankari Taluk Salem District.
5.Shri Pachiappa Granite Proprietor C. Balasubramanaiam Alaganur Sankari Taluk Salem District
...
Respondent(s)
Counsel appearing for the Applicant: M/s. R. Marudhachalamurthy and K. Mohan Nainar
Counsel appearing for the Respondents: Mrs. H. Yaseem Ali for R-1 & R-2 Mr. K.R. Gokul Krishnan for R-3 & R-4 M/s. Angamauthu and S. Sivakumar for R-5 Mrs. Vidyalakshmi for R-2 and R-6. Mrs. H. Yaseem Ali for R-7 and R-8
ORDER PRESENT: HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE PROF. Dr. R. NAGENDRAN, EXPERT MEMBER
Dated: 26th February, 2015 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The counsel for the parties are present.
It was brought to the notice of the
Tribunal in the last hearing that the operation of the Granite unit of the 5th respondent was stopped on inspection made on 12.2.2014 and thereafter it was not in operation. The counsel for the applicant took time to get instructions from his client and report. This day, he filed a copy of the plaint filed by the Proprietor of the 5 th respondent unit before the District Munsiff Court, Sankari for permanent injunction alleging that the applicant herein was interfering
in the operation of the unit
while he has got
necessary licence and permission from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (Board ) to carry on and thus it would be quite clear that he has been carrying on the unit.
When a query is made, the counsel for the Board on verification of the
factual situation from the concerned District Environmental Engineer would submit that an application for renewal of “Consent to Operate was given till 30 th September, 2014 and thereafter it was neither applied for renewal nor granted.
Added further,
the counsel for the Board that the 5th respondent unit is not carrying on its operation and the same is recorded. The counsel for the applicant would submit that even without the licence or permission, the 5th respondent unit is being operated during night hours and hence it has got to be restrained.
The applicant has sought for the following relief in the application:“1.
Restraining the 2nd respondent by way of permanent injunction for granting
consent order to 5th respondent under Section 21 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and under Section 25 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, (Central Act 6 of 1974) as amended, in Survey No.129/4, Ernapuram Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District; 2.
Direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the 5 th respondent, who
conducting Industrial Operation and causing pollution without obtaining proper permission from 2nd respondent after 31.3.2013.”
From the submissions made, it is quite clear that the renewal was given to the 5th respondent unit till 30th September, 2014 and thereafter it has not been renewed. From the submissions made by the counsel for the 5 th respondent, it could be seen that the renewal application for the period thereafter was filed and necessary fee therefor has also been remitted.
But there is nothing to indicate that
the renewal has been granted for the subsequent period.
Hence, it becomes
necessary to restrain the 5th respondent not to carry on its operational activities of
the Granite unit without necessary renewal therefor. There is no impediment for the 5th respondent to commence its activities if and when the renewal is granted on the application made by the 5th respondent by the Board.
The Board is also directed
to consider the application of the 5th respondent and pass suitable order in accordance with law.
It is also made clear that the District Environmental Engineer
concerned has to monitor that the operational activities of the 5th respondent shall not be carried out without the necessary permission and licence from the Board therefor. With the above observations and directions, the application is disposed of. No cost.
Justice M. Chockalingam Judicial Member
Prof. Dr. R. Nangendran Expert Member
