Jobin Sebastian vs Josemon J
2021 Latest Caselaw 18998 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
  FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 19TH BHADRA, 1943
                    CON.CASE(C) NO. 1395 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2020 IN WP(C).NO.9857 OF 2020
                 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:

          JOBIN SEBASTIAN, AGED 37 YEARS
          MANAGING PARTNER, PEE JAY TREADS,
          S/O SEBASTIAN JOSEPH,
          PANAMTHANATHU HOUSE, ULLANADU.P.O,
          ALAMATTOM, PALA-686651.

          BY ADV I.DINESH MENON


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     JOSEMON J, ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE
          POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, SRINIVASA
          IYER ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001.
          (FATHERS NAME AND AGE IS NOT KNOWN TO THE
          PETITIONER).

    2     HAREES.A.M., ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,
          KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
          DISTRICT OFFICE, SRINIVASA IYER ROAD, KOTTAYAM-
          686001.
          (FATHERS NAME AND AGE IS NOT KNOWN TO THE
          PETITIONER).


OTHER PRESENT:

          SRI T.NAVEEN - STANDING COUNSEL

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1395 OF 2021
                                       -2-


                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this contempt of court case alleging

non-compliance of the direction contained in Annexure A-1

judgment of this Court dated 02.12.2020 in W.P.(C).No.9857 of

2020, whereby that writ petition was disposed of with the

following directions:

(i) The 2nd respondent Environmental Engineer shall conduct an inspection in the petitioner's tyre retreading unit on 09.12.2020 at 11.00 am, in order to verify whether the petitioner has already complied with the direction contained in Annexure R2(b) by enclosing the building with sound proofing materials, along the side of the 6 th respondent's residence, in order to reduce the sound level further. The petitioner and the 6th respondent or his authorised representative shall be personally present in the unit, at the time of inspection.

(ii) After such preliminary inspection, the 2 nd respondent Environmental Engineer shall permit trial run in the petitioner's tyre retreading unit, for a period of three days, in order to find out whether the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise during 'day time' (from 6.00 am to 10.00 pm) and 'night time' (from 10.00 pm to 6.00 am) is within the permissible limits in the Schedule of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, read with Ext.P16 Government notification dated 20.04.2002 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1395 OF 2021

issued in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the said Rules.

(iii) After the trial run, the report of the 2 nd respondent Environmental Engineer on the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise in the petitioner's tyre retreading unit shall be furnished to the petitioner and the 6th respondent, within a period of three days, and thereafter, the 2nd respondent shall conduct a personal hearing, within a further period of one week, and take an appropriate decision on the matter, after adverting to the legal and factual contentions raised by the petitioner and the 6 th respondent. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner and the 6th respondent, forthwith.

(iv) Till such time, the interim order of this Court dated 12.05.2020 shall continue to be in force.

2. On 08.09.2021, when this contempt case came up for

admission, the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State

Pollution Control Board submitted that the 2nd respondent

Environmental Engineer has already taken a decision pursuant to

the direction contained in Annexure A-1 judgment, which shall be

communicated to the petitioner and also to the 6 th respondent in

the writ petition forthwith.

3. Today when the matter is taken up for consideration,

the learned Standing Counsel on instructions would submit that CON.CASE(C) NO. 1395 OF 2021

as a matter of fact order has already been communicated to the

petitioner, who is the Managing Partner of M/s. Pee Jay Treads

and also to the 6th respondent, on 31.08.2021 itself.

Recording the abovesaid submission made by the learned

Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board, this contempt

of court case is closed.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE.

bkn/-

CON.CASE(C) NO. 1395 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1395/2021

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.9857/2020 DATED 02.12.2020.