IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR WRIT PETITON NO. 683 OF 2019 (GM-POL) BETWEEN:
M/S. TOUGHWOOD AND ADHESIVES NO.93, MORGARAHALLI VILLAGE MYSORE KRS ROAD, HOSAHALLI POST S R PATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571438.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER B V SURESH.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K V, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY "PARISARA BHAVAN" 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR #49, CHURCH STREET, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICE, MANDYA-571438.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR CHESCOM, HINKAL, VIJAYANAGAR MYSORE-570001.
4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CHESCOM (O & M) SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571438.
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571438. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. , ADVOCATE) **** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CLOSURE ORDER DATED 24.12.2018 IN CASE PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, NARAYANA SWAMY J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The closure order dated 24.12.2018 has been issued to the petitioner from the State Pollution Control Board directing him to close the premises or work place. The closure order also has been issued on the basis of non compliance and contravention of the conditions of license made by the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the closure order issued is contrary to the provisions of the Pollution Control Board, that the petitioner has complied with the provisions which are mandatory, but despite of the fact that there is a compliance without application of mind the respondent has issued such a closure order and this is to be set aside and the petitioner is to be permitted to run the industry. Now in view of the closure the petitioner is not in a position to keep his workers and also to pay them.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the license itself has been expired on 30.09.2018 and in addition to other ground of non compliance and also for the reason that the license is expired this closure order is issued.
4. Learned counsel further submits that after expiry of the license in the month of September, 2018 and the closure order was issued in December, which itself shows that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. If there is any representation by the petitioner, it is for the respondent authorities to consider and pass appropriate orders, but on the basis of present situation we find that the license issued to the petitioner to run the industry has expired on 30.09.2018, in case if it is required for renewal the renewal application is to be made before expiry of the license. But in the instant case as it is submitted by the petitioner the applications have been made in the month of November, 2018, that means after expiry of the license. Under this circumstances, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 24(1) of the Act which the respondent has to consider and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month.
6. It is observed that these are all small scale industries established at the instance of the government in order to create entrepreneurship and also to solve the unemployment problem. Keeping the said principle in mind, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for renewal of license and pass appropriate order within a period of one month from today.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent authority is directed to convey the order passed by this Court today to enable the authorities to dispose of the matter within one month.
8. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make necessary applications to the respondent for interim relief for commencement of the industry. If such an application is preferred, it is for the respondent authority to pass appropriate orders. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE ykl