$-\ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI \I 70+ w.P.(c) 778012010 & cM APPL 2016012010 SUPER CASTING & ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ..... ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with 7I+ w.P.(c) 7781/2010 & CM APPL 20161/2010 SUPER ENTERPRISES .... Petitioner Through N4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ..... ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with I\4r. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-l Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with 72+ w.P.(c) 7782/2010 & cM APPL 2016212010 VI/S. NAV BHARAT CASTING ..... Petitioner Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate VETSUS DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE WP (Civit) 7780/2070 & batch Page 7 of 6 ! Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Irft. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with 73+ w.P.(c) 778312010 & cM APPL 2016312010 ]WS. BHARAT CASTING ""' Petitioner Through X4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate VETSUS DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ""' ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with \zlr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with 74+ w.P.(c) 778412010 & cM APPL 2016412010 I\{/S. SANJAY FOTINDRY ""' Petitioner Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate versus DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ""' ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with t5+ w.P.(c) 778s120r0 & cM APPL 20r6s120r0 VI/S. ASHA FOLINDRY ""' Petitioner Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate wP (civil) 7780/2070 & bqtch Page 2 of 6 versus DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ..... ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 with + w.P.(c) 7786120L0 & cM APPT, 2016612010 VI/S. ADARSH ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate VETSUS DE,LHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ..... ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with \zlr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 wirh 77+ w.P.(c) 778712010 & cM APPL 20167120t0 VI/S. AMRIT FOUNDRY ""' Petitioner Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate VETSUS DELLII POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE &,ANR ""' ResPondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 And 78+ w.P.(C) 778812010 & cM APPL 20r68120L0 wp (civit) 7780/2010 & batch Page 3 of 6 iWS. ASHA FOUNDRY Through N4r. T.S. Advocate VETSUS Ahuja with Mr. ..... Petitioner Satish Kumar, DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE & ANR ..... Respondents Through IMr. Sanjeev Ralli with IW. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2 JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 22.11.2010 CORAM: o w.P.(o 773012010 & cM APPL 20160/2010 w.P.(c) 7781/2010 & cM APPL 20161/2010 w.p.(c'l zzszlzoro c cM appl, zorezlzoro W.p.(Cl zzSslzOrO 8, CNI nppl, ZOT6SIZOTO w.p.(o zzs+lzoto c cu appl zot6+lzoto w.P.(O 778sl2010 & cM APPL 2016s/2010 w.p.(o zztolzoro c civr nppl, zor6elzoro wr.(ct zzgzlzoro c cnl A.ppL ZOt6Zlzoro w.p.(C'l zzSSlzOrO C' CM AppL ZO16SIZO1O l. These petitions challenge more or less similar closure orders of the petitioners, units passed by Delhi Pollution Control Committee ('DPCC') under Section 31 (A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ('Air Act'). 2. According to the DPCC these Petitioners who have been carrying on the activity of foundry for a long time are not complying with the pollution control norms. Further these foundry units are under the prohibited category of activities as per the Master plan for Delhi zozL lnspections were carried out but, admittedly, none of the Petitioners was served with a copy of the WP (civil) 7780/2070 & bdtch Page 4 of 6 respective inspection report on the basis of which the impugned closure order was passed. 3. In the considered view of this Court, on this short ground, that none of these Petitioners was given a copy of the inspection report, which formed the basis of the impugned direction for closure, the direction for closure cannot be sustained in law and deserves to be set aside. It is ordered accordingly. 4. The next question that arises is of the consequential order that has to be passed. Keeping in light similar orders passed by this Court on 19th October Z0I0 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 6975 of 2010 (lVhite Mschines v. DPCC) and 25th October 2010 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 710712010 (Anupam casting und Engineering works v. DPCC), this court considers it appropriate to direct as under: (i) the DPCC will treat the impugred orders in each of the cases be treated as a show cause notice issued to each of the Petitioners by the DPCC. (iD It will be open to the DPCC to undertake an inspection of the Petitioners' premises within ten days from today without any prior intimation to the Petitioners. Any fuither inspection report will be got signed by each of Petitioners and a copy furnished to each of them and an order will thereafter be passed after giving the Petitioners an opportunity of being heard. WP (civil) 7780/2070 & bqtch Page5ofS : b file (iii) In the meanwhile, it will be open to each of Petitioners to objections to the inspection report, handed over to learned counsel for Petitioners in Court today, within one week. (iv) Any consequential order that may be passed by the DPCC pursuant to the above directions will be communicated to each of Petitioners within ten days after it is passed. (") If aggrieved by such order, it will be open to each of the Petitioners to seek such remedies as provided under the Air Act' 5. It may be recorded at this stage that learned counsel for the Petitioners on instructions stated that none of Petitioners will carry on any activity in their respective foundries till 3l't December 2010 or till they receive the order of the DPCC passed in terms of this order, whichever is earlier. 6. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. The pending applications are also disposed of. 7. Order be given dasti. S.MURALIDHAR, J NOVEMBER 22,2010 rk WP (civil) 7780/2070 & batch Page 6 of 6