Bimal Krishnan vs the Environmental Engineer

Bimal Krishnan vs The Environmental Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 30, 2021

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1683696

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1683696
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman
Decided On: Nov 30, 2021
Case Number: WP(C)/20956/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bimal Krishnan

Respondent

The Environmental Engineer

Excerpt

.....up for admission on 30.11.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following:judgmentdated this the 30th day of november 2021 this writ petition is filed seeking directions to the first respondent to renew the consent to operate the cashew factory within a time limit.2. it is submitted by the learned counsel forthe petitioner that the cashew factory of the petitioner had been disfunctional from 2014 to june 2020 and that he had submitted a representation before the first respondent to waive the consent fees for the said period. it is further submitted that the petitioner had sought permission to operate the factory. but the same was not allowed by the respondents. it is submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this court, the 2 nd respondent has conducted an inspection in the premises of the petitioner on 23.10.2021 and a report has also been placed on record by the environmental engineer in this regard. the defects found in the functioning and the infrastructure had been duly informed to the petitioner by exhibit r1(f) notice dated 29.10.2021. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to take all the remedial steps as required in exhibit r1(f) and that the request of the petitioner for renewal of the consent may be considered at the earliest. it is also contended that the request made by the petitioner for the waiver of the consent fees may also be considered by the respondents. having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the fact that learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the remedial measures stated in exhibit r1(f) will be complied with by the petitioner without delay, this wit petition is disposed of with the following directions: the petitioner shall carry out the remedial measures in respect of the defects stated in exhibit r1(f)) at clauses 1 to 6. the 2nd respondent shall make site inspection after the petitioner informs the compliance with the said conditions. on.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 20956 OF 2021 PETITIONER: BIMAL KRISHNAN AGED 48 YEARS S/O KUNJUKRISHNA PILLAI RESIDING AT PUTHANPURAYIL, KILIKOLLOOR P.O.KOLLAM-691 004. BY ADVS. S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM) K.VIJAYAN PRIYA SHANAVAS R.RAJESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, USHUS BUILDING, BIG BAZAR, KOLLAM-691 001. 2 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD, OFFICE OF THE ASST. ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 008. BY ADVS. SRI. T.NAVEEN SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, N.SATHEESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of November 2021 This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the first respondent to renew the consent to operate the cashew factory within a time limit.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for

the petitioner that the cashew factory of the petitioner had been disfunctional from 2014 to June 2020 and that he had submitted a representation before the first respondent to waive the consent fees for the said period. It is further submitted that the petitioner had sought permission to operate the factory. But the same was not allowed by the respondents. It is submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the 2 nd respondent has conducted an inspection in the premises of the petitioner on 23.10.2021 and a report has also been placed on record by the Environmental Engineer in this regard. The defects found in the functioning and the infrastructure had been duly informed to the petitioner by Exhibit R1(f) notice dated 29.10.2021. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to take all the remedial steps as required in Exhibit R1(f) and that the request of the petitioner for renewal of the consent may be considered at the earliest. It is also contended that the request made by the petitioner for the waiver of the consent fees may also be considered by the respondents. Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the fact that learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the remedial measures stated in Exhibit R1(f) will be complied with by the petitioner without delay, this wit petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioner shall carry out the remedial measures in respect of the defects stated in Exhibit R1(f)) at Clauses 1 to 6. The 2nd respondent shall make site inspection after the petitioner informs the compliance with the said conditions. On the site inspections being conducted and the remedial measures being found satisfactory, the respondents shall take appropriate steps to renew the consent to operate. Further follow up action shall be taken by the respondents without delay. The request, if any, made by the petitioner for waiver of the fees for the period, when the period the factory was disfunctional shall also be duly considered in accordance with law. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SSK/30/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE ISSUED BY Exhibit P1

THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, KOLLAM TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO B2Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.9.2021

Exhibit P3 GIVEN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE Exhibit P4 EXECUTION OF ADDITIONAL DIRECTIONS ISSUE BY THE BOARD TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE 1ST Exhibit P5 RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.8.2021 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY Exhibit P6 THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.9.2021 TO THE Exhibit P7 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE COPY OF THE ONLICE CONSENT MANAGEMENT AND Exhibit P8 MONITORING SYSTEM DATED 22.9.2021 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO 762710972 DATED Exhibit P9 23.9.2021 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT REFUSAL ORDER ISSUED ANNEXURE R1(A) BY THE BAORD ON 15.11.2002. TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT REFUSAL ORDER ISSUED ANNEXURE R1(B) BY THE BAORD ON 29.11.2002. TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO OPERATE ISSUED BY ANNEXURE R1(C) THE BOARD TO THE UNIT ON 10.04.2003 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22.07.2020 ANNEXURE R1(D) ISSUED BY THE BOARD TO THE UNIT. TRUE COPY OF THE CLOSURE ORDER DATED 18.01.2021 ANNEXURE R1(E) ISSUED BY THE BOARD. TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTION DATED 29.10.2021 ANNEXURE R1(F) ISSUED BY THE BOARD. SSK //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties Bimal Krishnan vs The Environmental Engineer Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice Anu Sivaraman