Es Es Knit Process vs Chairman And Ors

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Considering the prayer in the application, we directed Mrs. Rita Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - State Pollution Control Board (Board) to take notice on behalf of the respondent - Board.

The applicant who has been carrying on dyeing and bleaching operation prior to 1987, was attached to Chinnakarai CETP to achieve 'zero' liquid discharge. A 'closure' order was passed against the applicant unit by the Board on 22.7.2005 based on the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. The applicant unit is one among the 422 units which have not complied with the directions issued by the High Court of Madras from time to time till 'closure' came to be passed under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as amended in 1988. It is also stated that Chinnakarai CETP to which the applicant unit is one of the members, was also closed due to the reason that it was unable to achieve 'zero' liquid discharge and that has been monitored by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras.

In the writ petitions filed before the High Court by the Noyyal River Ayacutdars Protection Association in W.P.Nos.29791 and 39368 of 2003 in the final order dated 22.12.2006 the writ petitions came to be disposed of by granting time upto 31st July, 2007 to the CETP to achieve 'zero' liquid discharge of trade effluents subject to various conditions.

As against the order of the High Court of Madras, the Tirupur Dyeing Factory Owners Association filed S.L.P before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was subsequently converted as Civil Appeal Nos.6776 and 6777 of 2009 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the final judgment dated 6.10.2009, confirming the judgment of the High Court of Madras, has directed that further three months time may be given to the CETP to ensure compliance of directions and also directed the Board to ensure that no pollution is caused giving strict adherence to the statutory provisions. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is as follows:

´27. Undoubtedly, there has been unabated pollution by the members of the appellant Association. They cannot escape the responsibility to meet out the expenses of reversing the ecology. They are bound to meet the expenses of removing the sludge of the river and also for cleaning the dam. The principles of "polluters-pay" and "precautionary principle" have to be read with the doctrine of "sustainable development". It becomes the responsibility of the members of the appellant Association that they have to carry out their industrial activities without polluting the water. A large number of farmers have suffered because of the pollution caused by them. They could not cultivate any crop in the said land. The committee had made a complete survey and assessed the loss and identified the families which are entitled to compensation. This Court only stayed the operation of the direction of the High Court to the extent that the units of the members of the appellant Association would be closed on 31st July, 2007. The said interim order has been extended from time to time. None of the other directions have been interfered with. A period of more than two and a half year has been passed. Many steps have been taken but the Association has to ensure the compliance of the orders passed by the High Court fully and in order to do, it is desirable that the Association be giving three months time to ensure compliance of directions to make the CETPs functional and pay the balance amount for cleaning the dam and river and meet the compensation to the adversely affected persons within a period of three months from today. The Pollution Control Board is directed to ensure that no pollution is caused, giving strict adherence, to the statutory provisions.´

It is stated that after the disposal of the case by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the Board has been monitoring the effluents of the CETP and ultimately after having satisfied that Chinnakarai CETP at S.F.No.275/2B, 265/2A, 255/4B, 271 and 266 at Veerapandi Village, Tiruppur South Taluk, Tiruppur District has achieved 'zero' discharge has granted renewal of 'consent' both under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 on 3.5.2016 and the renewal of 'consent' is valid upto 31.3.2017. It is stated that the CETP is functioning well under the supervision of the Board.

The applicant unit which was under closure ever since the date of passing of the order by the Board dated 22.7.2005, has made a representation to the Board on 9.12.2016 after the renewal of 'consent' granted to Chinnakarai CETP stating that the applicant unit should be permitted to be given 'consent' since according to the applicant the unit has also provided all infrastructure for the purpose of achieving 'zero' liquid discharge.

In view of the above said factual position which is not in dispute and is borne out on record, we are of the considered view that the respondents should consider the representation of the applicant dated 9.12.2016 in the light of the orders passed by the High Court as well as the Supreme Court in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the applicant dated 9.12.2016 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, after making necessary inspection.