Karnataka High Court
Kumar Organic Products Ltd vs The Karnataka State Pollution Control ... on 4 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
WP No. 19456 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 19456 OF 2023 (GM-POL)
BETWEEN:
1. KUMAR ORGANIC PRODUCTS LTD.,
PLOT NO. 60 AND 65 (UNIT.1), ROAD NO.3,
JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA,
ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN - 560 105.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED PERSON
ALOK KUMAR SINGH.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHIVARAJ N. ARALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION
signed by CONTROL BOARD
AMBIKA H B 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR, NO.49,
Location: CHURCH STREET,
High Court BENGALURU - 560 001,
of Karnataka REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.
2. THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER,
KSPCB REGIONAL OFFICE-ANEKAL,
NISARGA BHAVAN, THIMMAIAH RAOD,
7TH D MAIN, SHIVANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 058.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
WP No. 19456 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING BY
WRIT OF CERTIORARI ANNEXURE-A, ORDER/DEMAND NOTICE
BEARING NO.PCB/EC/2023-24/522, DATED 12/07/2023 PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT, IMPOSING AND DIRECTING THE
PETITIONER TO PAY WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS, INTERIM
ENVIRONMENT COMPENSATION OF RS.8,02,80,000/- (RUPEES
EIGHT CRORES TWO LAKHS EIGHTY THOUSAND ONLY) BY
DEMAND DRAFT IN FAVOUR OF MEMBER SECRETARY, KSPCB,
BENGALURU AND ETC,.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr. Shivaraj N. Arali for the
petitioner and learned advocate Mr. A. Mahesh Chowdhary for the
respondents-Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.
2. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution with
a prayer to quash the order/demand notice dated 12.07.2023
passed by respondent No.2-the Environmental Officer of Karnataka
State Pollution Control Board, whereby the petitioner is imposed
with and asked to pay within fifteen days, interim environment
compensation of Rs.8,02,80,000/-. It is further prayed to direct the
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
respondent-the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board and its
authority to consider the reply dated 28.07.2023 and 03.08.2023
filed by the petitioner in response to the aforementioned demand
notice.
3. Upon going through the subject matter challenge and the
grievance of the petitioner from the record of the petition with the
help of learned advocate for the parties, the Court could
immediately notice that the same controversy was addressed by
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M/s. Sansera Engineering
Limited Vs. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board which
was Writ Petition No.5389 of 2020 and cognate petitions decided
on 04.05.2024. The directions issued in the said order would
govern the present case since controversy is identical.
4. In course of the hearing, learned advocate for the petitioner
made a strenuous effort to contend that the respondent-the
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board has been passing the
orders despite the earlier direction issued by the Court. In this
request, he relied on decision of the Division Bench of this Court in
M/s. Paragon Polymers Products Private Limited Vs. The
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board and another which
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
was Writ Petition No.5847 of 2020 and alike petition decided
16.03.2020.
5. From the aforementioned decision in M/s. Sansera
Engineering Limited (supra) and other cognate petitions decided
on 04.07.2024, it could be seen that the decision in M/s. Paragon
Polymers Products Private Limited (supra) was been relied on
and considered before issuing the directions.
6. In the aforesaid view, the present petition has to follow the
same course as was in M/s. Sansera Engineering Limited
(supra).
7. The following directions are therefore issued in this petition,
(i) The case is remitted back to the respondent-Karnataka State
Pollution Control Board.
(ii) The Demand Notice shall be treated as show-cause-notice
issued by the State Pollution Control Board.
(iii) The petitioner shall be permitted to file its reply which may be
filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the present order.
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
(iv) The respondent-State Pollution Control Board shall consider
the reply and the defence of the petitioner.
(v) The Board shall give them opportunity of hearing.
(vi) The Board shall intimate the date to the petitioner in this
regard.
(vii) The petitioner shall be entitled to raise all the contentions,
both on facts and in law, against the impugned demand notice
asking for payment of Interim Environmental Compensation.
(viii) The respondent-State Pollution Control Board after affording
opportunity to the petitioner, as above, shall pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law.
(ix) The entire exercise shall be completed within a total period of
ten weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
(x) In order to enable the State Pollution Control Board to
undertake the aforesaid exercise of treating the demand notice to
be show-cause-notice and giving opportunity to the petitioner of
having heard and pass fresh orders, the impugned Demand Notice
is hereby set aside.
NC: 2024:KHC:44415-DB
8. It is clarified that the Court has not gone into the merits of the
case of the petitioner nor has expressed any opinion on the merits.
9. All the contentions raised by the petitioner before the State
Pollution Control Board shall be considered by the Board in
accordance with law and on their own merits.
10. This petition is disposed of in terms of the above directions
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND)
JUDGE
CR
