IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.13082/2019 (GM-POL) BETWEEN MR. A R ABHISHEK PROPRIETOR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS ABHISHEK STONE CRUSHER MUNICIPAL COLONY 6TH CROSS, KELAGOTE CHITRADURGA-577501 ... PETITIONER (BY SMT. ANNU BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE FOR SRI HARIKRISHNA S HOLLA, ADVOCATE) AND M/S. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, CA NO.02, 3RD MAIN KHB COLONY BEHIND PRAGATHI GRAMIN BANK NEAR KHB OFFICE SADIK NAGAR ROAD CHITRADURGA-577501 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI D NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO WITHDRAW NOTICE DATED 13.02.2019 (ANNEXURE-G) AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO RUN THE STONE CRUSHER UNIT IN PURSUANCE OF LICENCE DATED 21.02.2015 (ANNEXURE-E).
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner is running a stone crusher unit in Survey No.101/2 of Tamatagal Village, Chitradurga Taluk and District. By order dated 13.02.2019 as per Annexure-G, the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board has directed closure of the unit.
2. Smt. Annu Bhardwaj, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that it is recorded in the impugned order that the stone crusher unit was not functional since April 2018 and that being so, there could not be any pollution at all. It is submitted that in view of certain complaints which apparently submitted by persons who are inimically disposed towards the petitioner, the Pollution Control Board has passed the order without application of mind.
3. Shri D.Nagaraj, learned advocate for the Pollution Control Board submits that as early as in February 2018, a notice was issued to the petitioner proposing to take action. Since no reply was submitted by the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed.
4. In response, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already complied with the observations made by the Pollution Control Board and also submitted an explanation in response to order dated 13.02.2019.
5. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
6. Smt. Annu Bhardwaj, for the petitioner is right in her submission that it is recorded in the impugned order that the unit was not in operation since April 2018. In such circumstances, in our view, any further exercise by the Pollution Control Board was unnecessary. However, the impugned order has been passed directing the petitioner to stop the stone crusher unit. It is submitted that the petitioner has complied with the observations made by the Pollution Control Board and taken all measures to ensure that the area is not polluted.
7. In the circumstances, this writ petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. Order dated 13.02.2019 (Annexure-G) passed by the Pollution Control Board is quashed. Further, Pollution Control Board is directed to conduct fresh inspection within two weeks after issuing notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after considering spot inspection report and the remedial measures said to have been taken by the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Petitioner shall be permitted to commence operations based on the orders to be passed by the Pollution Control Board.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE bkv