1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.10.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Petition (MD)No.11765 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 P.N.Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai. 2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai. 3.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 4.The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Karur District, Karur. 5.M/s.Maha Dying, rep.by its Proprietor Sathyamoorthy, Vennaimalai Pasupathipalayam, Kathaparai Village, Vennaimalai Post, Karur Taluk, Karur District. ... Respondents Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to initiate action against the 5th respondent for operating the dyeing unit in violation of the pollution norms and without fulfilling the mandatory requirement of installing waste water treatment plant. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Vijayakumar For Respondent-3 : Mr.R.Anandraj, Govt.Advocate. For Respondents : Mr.C.Elaman 1,2 & 4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 O R D E R [Order of the Court was made BY K.N.BASHA, J] The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to initiate action against the 5th respondent for operating the dyeing unit in violation of the pollution norms and without fulfilling the mandatory requirement of installing waste water treatment plant. 2.Mr.C.Elaman, Standing Counsel for Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, takes notice for respondents 1, 2 and 4 and Mr.R.Anandraj, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for respondent No.3. By mutual consent of the learned counsel on either side, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is authorised to represent the villagers of Vennaimali Pasupthipalayam, Kathaparai Village and he has come forward with this petition as a public interest litigation in order to safeguard the health and life of the said villagers. It is contended that in the village more than 300 families, consisting 1200 members, are residing and most of them are deriving their income through agricultural activities and they are using regularly the common well for getting their drinking water and there is no separate source for drinking water for the villagers. 4.It is further submitted that the 5th respondent herein is running a dyeing unit in the village and he has not obtained any valid permission from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and he is running the said in violation of the norms prescribed by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 5th respondent herein, without treating the effluent, is letting out waste water in the open area which gets percolated and mixed with underground water and the same is polluting the underground water and the common well. The learned counsel would contend that pointing out the above illegal activities of the 5th respondent, the petitioner, along with other villages, preferred a representation dated 19.08.2911 to the 4th respondent and another representation to the respondents 1 and 2 on 26.08.2011. On 29.08.2011, the villagers approached the 3rd respondent and presented another representation. Only thereafter, the petitioner has received intimation from the 4th respondent on 29.08.2011 stating that the representations given by the petitioner were considered and the Factory Premises of the 5th respondent was inspected and the 5th respondent was advised to carry out effluent treatment plant and warned to avoid pollution and also stated to them that in the event of violation of such instructions, action would be taken. It is pointed out that on the same day, the 4th respondent has sent instructions in writing to the 5th respondent herein directing the 5th respondent to remove the Winch machine immediately, otherwise serious action would be taken against him. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 5.The learned counsel would submit that that inspite of such a warning and instruction given by the 4th respondent herein, the 5th respondent is continuing to operate his unit without following the rules and regulations of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and without even installing effluent treatment plant and causing serious health hazard to the public in the village and as such the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court with this petition with the aforesaid prayer. 6.Learned Standing Counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board would submit that effective steps have already been taken on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner by issuing notice, dated 29.08.2011, to the 5th respondent and further action would taken in the manner known to law. 7.Heard the learned Government Advocate for respondent No.3 in respect of the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. 8.We have considered the rival submissions made by the counsel on either side and perused the affidavit and other materials on record. 9.The fact remains that the petitioner has come forward with this public interest litigation representing the entire villagers expressing grievance to the effect that the 5th respondent, without following the rules and regulations and norms of the Pollution Control Board, is indulging in activities causing serious health hazards to the villagers as, the said Unit is functioning without any valid permission from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and in violation of the norms prescribed by the and also not erected effluent treatment plant. It is pertinent to note that on the basis of the representation of the petitioner, the 4th respondent herein on 29.08.2011 has already sent a notice to the 5th respondent directing him to remove the Winch Machine and also advised them to follow 'zero liquid' discharge. But, unfortunately, thereafter the Pollution Control Board has not taken any effective steps, as per the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 10.Under the said circumstances, this Court, without going into the merits of the representation of the petitioner, is constrained to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take further action on the basis of the representation made by the petitioner dated 19.08.2011, 26.08.2011 and 29.08.2011, by affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and also to the 5th respondent herein and thereafter to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law. It goes without saying that if the 5th respondent is found to be indulging in illegal activities of causing health hazard, by not following the rules https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 and regulations and norms of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board shall take serious action against the 5th respondent Unit to protect the interest of the villagers, more particularly to avoid health hazards. It is made clear that the above said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Records) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai. 2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai. 3.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 4.The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Karur District, Karur. +One cC to Mr.R.VIjayakumar, Advocate, SR.No.35451 +One CC to The Spl Govt. Pleader, SR.No.35860 gb rl/7c – 18.10.2011 ORDER IN WP(MD)No.11765/2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 Dated:13.10.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/