Mr. T. Victor vs Member Secretary And Ors

This application is brought forth seeking a direction to the 1st respondent, the Tamil Nadu State Pollution Control Board (Board) to pass orders on the representation of the applicant dated 9.1.2015 in accordance with law and in consonance with the report of the 2nd respondent, the District Environmental Engineer dated 11.2.2015 at the earliest. Heard the counsel for the applicant and also for the respondent Board and all the materials made available are looked into. The following would emerge as facts admitted.

The applicant who is the owner of the property situated at No.16, Periyar 4th Cross Street, Srinivasa Nagar, Padi Post, Chennai-600 050 was carrying on a small scale industry in the ground floor of the premises in the name and style M/s. Victor Industries Heavy Planner Milling after obtaining necessary service connection therefor from the Electricity Board. The activities of the Unit involved receipt of thick sized MS steel plates, reduction of size using heavy duty planner milling machine (5 Nos), getting thin seized MS steel plates of required size, inspection of the same and despatch. Pursuant to the complaints made dated 29.8.2013 and 31.8.2013 alleging severe noise pollution and disturbance to the livelihood in the primary residential area an inspection was made by the officials of the Board on 3.9.2013 during which it was found that the Unit was located in a residential area, that the Unit originally obtained power connection for 5 HP electric motor from the Tamil Nadu State Electricity Board and later obtained connection for 30 HP electric motor to carry out heavy planner milling that too in the primary residential area. It was also noticed that the Unit was carrying on its operation without obtaining Consent from the Board. Therefore, a show cause notice was served upon the Unit which was followed by a reply dated 16.9.2013. Not satisfied with the reply and in view of noise pollution created by the high HP motot as against the permitted 5 HP motor in the primary residential area and also without obtaining the Consent from the Board, the Unit was given an opportunity for a personal hearing on 4.10.2013.

The applicant herein filed a written statement stating that the complaints were false. At the time of personal hearing it was admitted by the applicant that the Unit has been carrying on its activities with 35 HP machinery. The complainants were present and made statement to the effect that their objection was that the noise pollution was causing disturbance to the livelihood by operation of the machinery with high HP motors round the clock and if the Unit was adhering to the permissible HP, they had no objection that too during the hours as permitted by the rules. The DEE concerned recording the statement of the parties recommended to the Board for issuing direction to the Unit dated 13.12.2013 that

the Unit should remove the additional installed 30 HP heavy duty planner milling machines immediately as the Unit is located in the primary residential area declared by the CMDA,

the Unit should operate with machines of 5 HP motor only along with adequate noise pollution control measures as permitted in the primary residential area by CMDA.

the operation and activities of the Unit should not give room for complaints from the residents of that area by causing pollution.

After receiving the report from the DEE, the Board issued a direction for closure and also for disconnection of the electricity power supply under Section 33-A of the Water Act 1974 and under Section 31A of the Air Act, 1981 as amended by its proceedings No.T11/TNPCB/F.044778/AMB /COMP/W&A/2013 dated 8.2.2014. In pursuance of the said direction, the Electricity Board disconnected the service connection on 14.02. 2014. The applicant made a representation to the Board for revocation of the closure order and restoration of the power supply by a communication dated 12.3.2014. After shifting the machinery from the said premises, again an inspection was made by the DEE concerned on 17.6.2014. It was reported by the DEE that during his inspection the Unit was not in operation and the entire machinery was removed from the premises. The applicant made a request for the revocation of the closure order and restoration of power supply assuring that the premises would be used only for the office purpose or for residential purpose by a communication dated 12.3.2014. On the recommendation of the DEE, the Board made a revocation of the closure order and also for restoration of power supply to the Unit by it communication dated 21.3.2014 and 19.6.2014 respectively subject to the following conditions:-

The Unit should not install the machinery again in the premises

The Unit premises should be used only for the office or residential purposes.

While making the revocation order and also for restoration of the power supply, it was also made clear that a fresh application for new E.B service connection was to be considered for lighting purposes only. While the matter stood so, the applicant made a request on 15.9.2014 explaining the difficulty in getting a new supply connection from the Electricity Board, the loss of security deposit which was already made for the existing connection and he further requested revocation of the old EB connection only to the extent of carrying on the operation upto 5 HP motor. On the strength of the communication, the DEE made recommendation to the Board for restoration of the existing power supply on the condition that the Unit should operate the machinery with 5 HP motor only. Following the recommendation made by the DEE, the power supply was restored pending the application before the Board. Under the circumstances, the applicant filed a Writ Petition No.13820 of 2015 before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras seeking directions to the Board to consider his representation and pass suitable orders. The said Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.4.2015. Following the same, the instant application was filed for the above relief.

After taking the application on file, notice was ordered to the respondents who entered appearance and filed their reply. While all the effective factual position are admitted by both parties what is all required by the applicant is only a direction to the Board to consider the application/representation filed by him with a request to permit him to carry on his industrial activities with 5 HP motor which is permissible in law. In view of the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal has to agree with the case of the applicant that he should not be driven to apply for a new service connection from the Electricity Board. Firstly, it would not be easier for him to obtain new connection and secondly there might be a possibility of him losing the security deposit already paid by him.

On a direction given by the Tribunal the entire file pertaining to the Unit of the applicant was produced and perused. Though the applicant was operating on a cottage industry by obtaining 5 HP service connection from the Electricity Board he was carrying on his industrial activities with 35 HP motor without Consent of the Board that too in a residential area which necessitated for issuing a closure order and also a direction to the Electricity Board for disconnection of power supply. It is also clear from the available records that the applicant has removed all the machinery from the premises and made a request by way of representation that he should be permitted to carry on his industrial activities which are permissible in law by using 5 HP motor. The applicant has filed a copy of the proceedings of the Second Master Plan for Chennai Metropolitan Area, 2026 wherein at Sl.No.14 "Primary Residential Use Zone" sub-clause( vii) reads as follows:-

vii) Cottage industries listed in G.O. Ps.Nos.565 and 566 dated 12.3.1962 as amended and indicated in Annexure V, with number of workers not exceeding 8 and electric machineries not exceeding 5 HP.

The applicant has filed an undertaking affidavit to the effect that he would carry on the business of engraving on metals with the aid of 5 HP motor as permitted under the aforesaid Master Plan. Hence, no impediment is felt by the Tribunal in issuing a direction to the Board if necessary application / representation is filed by the applicant then to consider the application and pass suitable orders in accordance with law granting Consent duly stipulating all the necessary conditions which are warranted and taking into consideration that the Unit is situated in primary residential area and also taking into consideration the rules framed by the CMDA within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copies of the order.

The concerned DEE who is present, is also directed to make an inspection of the Unit after establishment of the same following the granting of Consent and also to monitor whether the activities of the applicant are in strict compliance of the conditions stipulated in the Consent Order.

With the above directions, the application stands disposed of. No order as to costs.