A.R. Sharma vs State of Punjab & Ors

By this Review Application, review applicant(respondent no.3 in OA 165/2024) is seeking review of order dated 21.02.2024 passed in O.A. No. 165/2024 whereby a joint committee has been formed.

The  Original  Application  has  been  filed  raising  the  grievance against the review applicant, stated to be in the business of solvent extraction, refining and supply of refined rice bran oil located at Nakodar road, Jagraon, District Ludhiana, Punjab. The allegation in the OA is that respondent no. 3 in the OA (review applicant) is contaminating ground water by violating the environmental norms installing inadequate capacity ETP in the premises which is not working properly and adopting bypass mechanism resulting in discharge of untreated effluent and consequently the coloured ground water is coming out.

The Tribunal by order dated 21.02.2024 passed in the OA had issued notice to the respondents therein including the Review Applicant and constituted a joint Committee to ascertain the factual position

Submission of learned Counsel for the Review Applicant is that order dated 21.02.2024 has been passed in violation of principles of ‘Natural Justice’ because the review applicant has not been heard at that stage and that one joint Committee report, filed along with the Review Application, already exist in respect of the premises in question.

Opposing the Review Application, learned Counsel for the Original Applicant has submitted that there is no violation of the principles of ‘Natural Justice’.

We have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.

The scope of review is very limited. Review can be maintained only if there is an error apparent on the face of record in the order.

By the order dated 21.02.2024, considering the allegations made in the OA, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter and without stating anything against the review applicant, the Tribunal had formed the joint Committee to get the factual status report. Such a report is subject to the objection by all the concerned parties and any conclusion noted by the joint Committee will not be treated as final without hearing the parties and without examining the same. Hence, at that stage, it was not necessary to hear the review applicant.

So far as the reliance of the review applicant on the earlier report filed along with the Review Application is conerned, we find that the Committee which has submitted the said report was not constituted by any order of the Tribunal and even otherwise, the report is based upon the inspection conducted on 06.07.2023. If any such report exist, then the  review  applicant  can  always  place  reliance  upon  the  same  while opposing the OA but that does not furnish a ground to seek review.

Learned Counsel for the review applicant has placed reliance upon paragraph  23  of  the  judgment  of  the  Hon’ble  Supreme  Court  in  the matter of Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station v. Ashwani Kumar Dubey & Ors. reported in (2023) 8 SCC 35 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:-

“23. Therefore, applying the aforesaid principle to the cases that come up before the NGT, if the NGT intends to rely upon an Expert Committee report or any other relevant material that comes to its knowledge, it should disclose in advance to the party so as to give an opportunity for discussion and rebuttal. Thus, factual information which comes to the knowledge of NGT on the basis of the report of the Committee constituted by it, if to be relied upon by the NGT, then, the same must be disclosed to the parties for their response and a reasonable opportunity must be afforded to present their observations or comments on such a report to the Tribunal.”

In view of the above judgment, expert committee report cannot be relied  upon  by  the  Tribunal  without  discussing  it  in  advance  to  the effected party and without giving opportunity of rebuttal. In the present, report is yet to be received and on receipt of the report a copy thereof will be supplied to the review applicant and opportunity of rebuttal will be granted and thereafter report will be accepted or rejected.

Learned Counsel for the review applicant has also placed reliance upon the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 30.01.2024 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 1865-1866/2022: Veena Gupta & Anr. V. Central Pollution  Control  Board  &  Ors.  In  that  case,  Tribunal  had  held  the appellant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court guilty and directed payment of compensation and had also dismissed the review petition and before the Hon’ble Supreme Court allegation was that the appellant was not heard in that process. Therefore, Hon’ble Supreme Court had held as under:-

“6. It appears that the appellants did not have a full opportunity to contest the matter and place all their defenses before the Tribunal. They filed this appeal and by order dated 04.03.2022, this Court stayed the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal. This was inevitable. Two years have passed by and the stay is still operating. We have no other alternative except to set aside the orders dated 31.08.2021 and 26.11.2021 and remand the matter back to the Tribunal. The Tribunal issue notices to all the necessary parties, hear them in detail, and pass appropriate orders. Needless to say that the Tribunal shall hear the case, uninfluenced by the observations and conclusions drawn in the orders dated 31.08.2021 and 26.11.2021.”

In the present case, Tribunal has already issued notice in the OA to the review applicant on 21.02.2024. The review applicant will have full opportunity to file response and oppose the OA and also object to the report of the joint Committee constituted in pursuance to the order dated 21.02.2024 as and when the said report is filed.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits by way of the interim order, final prayer has been granted. We make it clear that we have constituted the joint Committee for ascertaining the current status so that the Tribunal can reach to the proper conclusion in the matter and that constitution of the joint Committee is independent of the prayer made in the OA.

Learned Counsel appearing for the PPCB has informed that in pursuance to the order of the Tribunal dated 21.02.2024, the joint inspection has already been carried out on 26.04.2024 and the report will be submitted before the Tribunal in a short while. Even otherwise, the Counsel for the review applicant could not show any prejudice caused to the review applicant on account of the collection of samples by the joint Committee formed by this Tribunal.

In  the  above  circumstance,  we  find  no  merit  in  this  Review Application, which is accordingly dismissed.