Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pollution Control Board Vs. Jadav Shop Works and ors.

Pollution Control Board vs Jadav Shop Works and ors.

Disposition Appeal dismissed Court Guwahati Decided Mar 31, 2004
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/132526

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Guwahati High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.A. No. 360 of 1999
Subject
;Environment
Disposition
Appeal dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
;Environment
Outcome / disposition
Appeal dismissed
Acts & sections
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Sections 2, 21 and 31A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pollution Control Board

Advocate C. Baruah, Adv.

Respondent

Jadav Shop Works and ors.

Advocate B.R. Dey, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Sections 2, 21 and 31A

Excerpt

- .....section 31a makes it absolutely clear that the powers can be exercised by issuance of any direction, in the exercise of the boards powers and performance of its functions under the act, i.e., air (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1981. the board's authority and jurisdiction to issue directions under section 31a imbibes from any breach of the respondents in performance of any provision of the act. section 21 says that subject to the provisions of section 21, no person shall, without the previous consent of the state board, establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area. by virtue of section 21 the previous consent of the state board is required to establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area. the industrial plant is defined under section 2(k) of the act, as per section 2(k) the 'industrial plant' means any plant used for any industrial or trade purposes and emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere. industrial plant for the purposes of the act and particularly section 21, would be a plant which is emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere. thus, for exercising powers under section 31a it is necessary for the board to reach to the conclusion that the plant is emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere, unless and until the basic finding is arrived at, the plant would not be an industrial plant' within the meaning of section 2(k) of the act. in the present case no such finding has been arrived at by the pollution control board and, therefore, exercise of the powers under section 31a of the act, on the ground that the respondents have not complied with the provisions of section 21, is without any jurisdiction and authority.4. for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find that any case is made out for interference. the appeal is dismissed.

Full Judgment

P.P. Naolekar, C.J.

1. By order/letter dated 16.2.1994 the industry of the respondents was closed down. The notices and the order of closure of the 'industry passed by the Pollution Control Board was challenged by filing a writ petition in the High Court. The order dated 16.2.1994 has been quashed by the learned Single Judge. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal has been filed.

2. The submission of Mr. C. Baruah, learned counsel for the appellant is that the Pollution Control Board has authority to issue any order or direction in exercise of the powers under Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981 and as the respondents did not comply with the provisions of Section 21 of the Act the Board has rightly directed closure of the industry.

3. A bare reading of the Section 31A makes it absolutely clear that the powers can be exercised by issuance of any direction, in the exercise of the Boards powers and performance of its functions under the Act, i.e., Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The Board's authority and jurisdiction to issue directions under Section 31A imbibes from any breach of the respondents in performance of any provision of the Act. Section 21 says that subject to the provisions of Section 21, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board, establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area. By virtue of Section 21 the previous consent of the State Board is required to establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area. The industrial plant is defined under Section 2(k) of the Act, As per Section 2(k) the 'Industrial plant' means any plant used for any industrial or trade purposes and emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere. Industrial plant for the purposes of the Act and particularly Section 21, would be a plant which is emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere. Thus, for exercising powers under Section 31A it is necessary for the Board to reach to the conclusion that the plant is emitting any air pollutant into the atmosphere, Unless and until the basic finding is arrived at, the plant would not be an Industrial plant' within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Act. In the present case no such finding has been arrived at by the Pollution Control Board and, therefore, exercise of the powers Under Section 31A of the Act, on the ground that the respondents have not complied with the provisions of Section 21, is without any jurisdiction and authority.

4. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find that any case is made out for interference. The appeal is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial