'Patience To Put Up With Environmental Violations Has Run Dry': JKL High Court Denies Relief To MSME Unit Shut Over Seizure Of 1350Kg Banned Plastic

Dismissing a plea challenging a closure order of the petitioner's unit/premises by the J&K Pollution Control Board, Justice Rahul Bharti of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed,

"Patience to put up with the violations and the violators of the ecological environment has now run dry. The law needs to take charge, and in fact has taken charge, of the situation to deal with the environment related violations and violators impatiently and for that the enforcers of the law need to be fast paced as in the present case where the law enforcers have acted with promptness and preemptively and this is what is serving the call of duty to protect the environment".

In the instant case the petitioner firm got itself registered on 12.01.2018 as a Micro Scale Industrial Unit and intended to carry on manufacturing of Polythene Carry-bags (above 50 microns specification) .

For the purpose of carrying on such industrial activity, the petitioner applied online for consent to establish (CTE) followed by an online application filed on 06.10.2018 for consent to operate (CTO) before the respondent no. 2 but the said applications came to be rejected by the respondents.

Notwithstanding the rejection the petitioner ventured to start and run the industrial activity which resulted in an inspection under J&K Non-Biodegradable Material (Management, Handling and Disposal) Act, 2007 and seizure of 1350 kgs banned polythene bags from the petitioner's premises.

Subsequently respondents came to issue a closure order of the petitioner's unit/premises which was challenged before the High Court.

Justice Bharti said it is not forthcoming whether the petitioner engaged itself in the manufacturing activity of paper napkins and HM/LD Polythene Bags (above 50 microns) with any due and proper permission of the State Pollution Control Board. The omission to address any averment on this aspect by the petitioner in its writ petition in a sense amounts to a latent admission that the petitioner was not having any such pollution related requisite permission/authority/approval from the respondents' end, the bench underscored.

Pointing out to the fact that the petitioner for running the unit needed a permission but in the absence of the same, the petitioner could not be heard to insist that the impugned order dated 15.05.2019 is bad because of any procedural deficiency or non-compliance.

"The onus was and is always to be upon the petitioner to show as to how without seeking the requisite permission/authority/approval from the respondent Pollution Control Board, it can afford to run its business activity which otherwise requires the pollution related permission", the bench added.

Lauding the efforts of respondents in acting promptly against the anti-environment activities of the petitioner, the bench observed, law need to be fast paced as in the present case where the law enforcers have acted with promptness and preemptively and this is what is serving the call of duty to protect the environment.

Acknowledging the proactively untiring efforts of the Supreme Court in environment related matters Justice Bharati observed,

"The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, being in the forefront, in almost every case/cause dealt or being dealt with by it relating to environment & pollution related, and matter is letting no moment to go waste in confirming and reconfirming that the law is positioning itself to be on the side of the Environment than on the side of the Man".

In view of the aforesaid discussion the bench dismissed the petition with costs of Rs. 20, 000/-against the petitioner to be paid within period of one month.

Case Title : M/s S. S. Industries, Shanker Colony, Gangayal Vs UT of J&K and Ors.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 259

Coram : Justice Rahul Bharti

Click Here to Read/Download Order