AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By this appeal filed under Section 18 of the Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Act, 2021 (CAQM Act) read with Section 16 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, the Appellant has challenged the order of the CAQM dated 05.08.2026 for closure of the industry under Section 12(2)(11) of the CAQM Act.
The appellant is stated to be a unit engaged in manufacture and supply of packaged and loose wholesale food products, having its manufacturing facility at Plot No. 2272-2275, Phase-II, Rai Industrial Area, Sonipat, Haryana. The inspection of the appellant unit was carried out by the flying squad of the CAQM on 24.07.2026, wherein the violation of the norms and consent conditons was found. Therefore, the preliminary inspection report-cum-acknowledgement was prepared by the flying squad noting the following violations: “Wet scrubber is mentioned in amended CTO, however bag filter is installed, black smoke was observed for few minutes after which operations were stopped. Purchase order for new bag filter had already been placed.”
The CAQM thereafter had passed the impugned order dated 05.08.2026, which takes note of the inspection of the unit by the flying squad on 24.07.2026 and also states that the preliminary inspection report was provided to the Project Proponent and Project Proponent was directing to show cause for the proposed action. The impugned order records the following violations:
“WHEREAS, it was reported during the inspection that Cyclone and Wet scrubber are mentioned as APCD for Thermic Fluid Heater (TFH) in amended CTO, but instead bag filters were being used in the TFH installed in the factory. Further, black smoke emissions were observed due to malfunctioning in the bag filter. The unit informed to the flying squad that a purchase order for a new bag filter has already been placed.”
By the impugned order the CAQM had issued the following directions:
“NOW, THEREFORE, in view of the above and in exercise of the powers of the Commission by the Enforcement Task Force, under Section 12(2)(xi) of the Act, read with explanation, the following directions are issued to the said unit for strict compliance:
1.The unit shall immediately close down all its industrial operations and activities upon receipt of this Direction. Such closure shall operate as an interim measure and shall remain in force until further directions of the Commission;
2.The unit shall immediately thereafter report the closure of the unit to the Commission and Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB):
3.The unit, under no circumstances, shall resume operations without prior permission and an order of resumption from the Commission:
4.The UHBVNL shall, on receipt of this closure direction shall immediately initiate action towards temporary disconnection of electrical power supply to the site / unit and report the same to the HSPCB, project proponent and the Commission, at the earliest but not later than 3 days after the issue of this Direction.
5.In case of failure in compliance with the above directions, the Commission will be constrained to initiate appropriate action, in accordance with provisions under the Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Act, 2021 and other relevant laws.”
The impugned order also provides for the resumption of operation of the unit on complying with the following conditions:
“6.For consideration of resumption of operations in the unit, the following needs to be complied with: i. After taking due corrective and preventive measures, in respect of the non-compliances / violations as noted in the closure direction, the project proponent shall report the same to the Regional Officer Sonipat of the Haryana State Pollution Control Board, also under advise to the headquarter office of the UPPCB. ii. The Regional Officer, HSPCB shall thereafter verify the corrective and preventive measures initiated by the unit / project proponent and submit a report in this context to the HSPCB headquarter office along with a recommendation for levying of EC charges, as per extant Guidelines, duly taking cognizance of Standard Schedule for EC charges issued by the Commission vide order dated 01.01.2025 & 05.06.2025. iii. The HSPCB shall review the report of the Regional Officer in this context to ascertain effectiveness of actions initiated for compliance, levy appropriate EC charges on the Unit for all categories of violations as noted in this direction and realise the same, from the proponent. A recommendation towards resumption of activities in the industrial unit etc. may be made to the Commission by the HQ office of the HSPCB.
iv.The Project Proponent shall thereafter also report compliance of all the requisites as above to the Commission, in the form of an affidavit. The indicative procedure and guidelines for processing of the cases for resumption, including the format for the affidavit may be accessed from the Commission's website www.caqm.nic.in >> Closures/Resumptions >>
GUIDELINES FOR RESUMPTION OF OPERATIONS IN
CLOSED UNITS. v. In exercise of powers of the Commission under Section 14 of the Act, the Member Secretary, HSPCB shall also initiate action for prosecution under section 14 of the Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Act, 2021 against the said unit.”
Questioning the impugned order, Learned Counsel for the appellant has raised the plea that there are three boilers in the appellant unit out of which two are running on PNG which are not violating and so far as the third boiler is concerned, appellant is using the cyclone and bag filter since before, and no objection was raised in the earlier inspections by the PCB and CAQM. He has further submitted that to reduce the emission, bigger bag filters have been ordered and the appellant is in the process of installing a bigger bag filter and have applied to the HSPCB for amending the CTO and permitting the use of cyclone and bag filter, instead of cyclone and wet scrubber. He has further submitted that closure order has not yet been served.
Learned counsel appearing for the CAQM opposing the appeal, has submitted that the appellant must comply with all the requisite conditions of the CTO and must not violate the environmental norms. Learned counsel for the CAQM has pointed out that in compliance of the order of the Tribunal dated 11.08.2026, fresh inspection of the appellant unit was done on 13.08.2026. He has handed over the inspection report, wherein the following status was found:
“Detailed Observation of inspection of M/s Bikanerwala Foods Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 2272-2275, Phase-II, Rai Industrial Area, Sonipat, Haryana:
•The unit is engaged in food and food processing activities.
•All the boilers (1 TFH and 2 PNG based) were found to be sealed. The TFH was earlier operated on pellets.
•The bag filter installed earlier with 1 TFH biomass based boiler was disconnected and the preparation for installation of the new bag filter was under progress. However, the new bag filter was yet to be installed.
•An application for amendment in the existing CTO had been submitted for correction in the type of Air Pollution Control Device i.e. bag filter.
•At the time of inspection, all boilers and plant machinery were sealed and plant was not operational.”
Learned counsel for the CAQM has submitted that if the appellant is allowed to operate on partial compliance, it should not be treated as precedent.
Having heard the counsel for the parties on the perusal of the record it is noticed that the original CTO dated 17.03.2020, mentions the details of three boilers out of which two are PNG fired and one is coal fired. The CTO has been amended and amended CTO dated 22.12.2025 has been issued. In this amended CTO the type of fuel has been prescribed as biomass fuel. The amended CTO dated 22.12.2025, records the details of control equipment (cyclone/multi-cyclone/bag filter/ESP) and permits the use of “cyclone and wet scrubber.” So far as the two boilers running on PNG are concerned no violation has been found. So far as the third boiler running on the biomass fuel is concerned, it was found to be running on cyclone and bag filter instead of cyclone and wet scrubber.
It has been fairly stated by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that the appellant will not operate the third boiler which uses biomass fuel till the CTO is again amended and use of cyclone and bag filter is permitted.
Learned counsel for the HSPCB, has also submitted that in terms of Clause 6 of the impugned order the exercise of levy of the Environmental Compensation will be duly completed. He has informed that the Regional Officer has already made the recommendation and ECAC will calculate the EC and the final order will be passed within four weeks.
Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has stated on instructions that the order of imposition of EC will duly be complied with.
In view of the above, and considering the fact that the appellant has now assured compliance of CTO conditions and environmental norms and in the fresh inspection no violation has been noted and even otherwise in terms of the impugned order the resumption of operation is permitted by complying the procedures/conditions set out in Clause 6 thereof for which the process is already going on and the HSPCB will complete the exercise of levy and recovery of EC within four weeks, we allow this appeal on the following terms:
The appellant is permitted to resume the operation of the unit subject to compliance of all the environmental norms and clearance conditions.
The appellant will inform CAQM before starting the operation of the third boiler which runs on biomass fuel.
The appellant will run the third boiler using biomass strictly in terms of the CTO conditions.
The HSPCB will complete the pending process of imposition of EC and pass the final order within four weeks which will be duly complied with by the appellant as stated above.
Prakash Shrivastava, CP Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM August 14, 2026 Appeal No. 90/2026 (IA No. 597/2026) HK