Civil Writ Petition No. 12594 of 2007 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: February 26, 2009 Sher Singh ............ Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ............. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3 Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for respondent No. 4 Mr. T.P.Singh, Advocate for respondents No. 5 to 8 ***** T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) This petition has been filed in public interest for a writ of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 4 to initiate action against respondents No. 5 to 8 who are disposing off/draining the chemical water of adjoining dye units in the land owned by the Gram Panchayat, of which the petitioner happens to be the Sarpanch. The petitioner's case as set out in the petition is that land measuring 10.1/2 acres situate in village Azizulapur on the outskirts of the Civil Writ Petition No. 12594 of 2007 [2] town of Panipat is owned by the village Panchayat Azizulapur. The said piece of land was, according to the petitioner, leased to respondents No. 5 to 8 for agricultural purposes. Instead of using the land for the purpose for which it was leased, the said respondents appear to have permitted for monetary consideration certain dyeing units situate in the area to drain their chemical effluents into the land in question. As a result of this illegal draining of water on to the land owned by the Panchayat, the fertility of the land has been adversely affected and agriculture operations in the same made impossible. Photographs attached with the petition have been relied upon in order to show that the entire area is now in the form of a tank full of weeds and effluents from the dyeing units. It is alleged that since the Haryana State Pollution Control Board did not take any action in the matter, the petitioner was left with no alternative except to approach this Court for intervention and mandamus directing the State Pollution Control Board to take action against respondents No. 5 to 8 and also the dyeing units which were draining the effluents on to the land in question. Mr. Walia, counsel appearing for the Haryana State Pollution Control Board, has filed a counter affidavit, inter alia, pointing out that the State Government have in consultation with all the limbs of the State machinery taken a decision to shift the polluting dyeing units that have come up in a haphazard and unsystematic manner in residential and non conforming area of the city of Panipat to Sector 29 Part II, of that City. It is stated that most of the dyeing units are operating in the city of Panipat without any Effluent Treatment Plant and generate untreated trade effluent causing water pollution in the whole of the city. The Board has also filed Action Taken Report in compliance with order dated 07.11.2008 in which it Civil Writ Petition No. 12594 of 2007 [3] is, inter alia, pointed out that five units responsible for draining water on to the land owned by the Panchayat were issued show cause notices dated 22.09.2008 for closure. The sixth unit M/s B.S. Dye House, near Azizulapur, Barsat Road, Panipat, was also given a similar notice under section 33-A of the Water Pollution Control Act, 1974. In response to the said notices, three of such units, viz. Nitin Dye House, Virk Dye House and B.S. Dye House, Panipat, did not appear to avail the personal hearing offered to them. The said units were thereafter ordered to be closed down vide order dated 15.12.2008, a copy of which is attached with the Action Taken Report as Annexures R-1, R-2 and R-3. Three other units, viz. M/s Malik Traders, M/s R.K. Enterprises and M/s Malik Enterprises, Panipat, however, appeared and were asked to instal the treatment plants for treatment of the effluents failing which the units would be closed down. The Chairman of the Board then passed an order on 15.12.2008 directing that the said units shall submit their scheme for installation of effluent treatment plant within 15 days and till the time they did so, bleaching process shall be shut down. Consequently, the six units mentioned above are lying closed and are not discharging any untreated effluent. Counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, contends that although according to the Action Taken Report, the units have been shut down, the fact of the matter is that untreated effluent continues to spread into and accumulate over the land in question. There is according to the learned counsel no effective implementation of the closure order by the Pollution Control Board with the result that the nuisance continues to persist and those responsible for the same continue to prosper. It is submitted that this Court could issue directions for a proper implementation of the closure order so that untreated Civil Writ Petition No. 12594 of 2007 [4] effluent discharged from the dyeing units does not play havoc with the environment of the area nor cause any damage to the valuable property owned by the Panchayat. It is also submitted that the damage already caused to the land owned by the Panchayat has to be compensated by those who are responsible for the same. We have given our careful consideration to the submissions made at the bar. According to the respondents, the polluting units have been shut down in terms of the orders mentioned in the Action Taken Report. Action Taken Report, however, does not go further to state that the water accumulated on the land owned by the Panchayat was being drained only from the six units referred to earlier. It appears that there is a certain amount of laxity on the part of the Pollution Control Board in taking appropriate action against all those responsible for causing the pollution in question. The Pollution Control Board would, therefore, do well not only to prevent draining of the effluents by the units that are already shut down but may be operating illegally as also from other units that are situate in the vicinity and are violating the statutory norms on the subject. The petitioner can in this regard approach the Pollution Control Board giving specific instances and seeking specific action against those responsible for draining the chemical water. As and when any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the Chairman of the Pollution Control Board shall immediately look into the matter and take appropriate steps in accordance with law. In so far as compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the land owned by the Panchayat is concerned, we do not think that it is possible for us in the present proceedings to embark upon any inquiry as to the extent of such damage and to fix the liability upon those responsible for Civil Writ Petition No. 12594 of 2007 [5] causing the same. The proper course, in our opinion, is that the petitioner Panchayat should seek compensation in appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum including civil action, if so advised. The writ petition with the above directions and observations is disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs. ( T.S. THAKUR ) CHIEF JUSTICE 26.02.2009 ( HEMANT GUPTA ) khushbir JUDGE