🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Shivans Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Case No: Writ Petition (C) No. 5976 of 2011

Date of Decision: March 26, 2012

Citation: (2012) 2 EFLT 678 : (2012) 2 JCR 651

Hon'ble Judges: Poonam Srivastava, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: A.K. Sahani, Anand Kr. Sinha, for the Appellant; Anil Kumar Sinha, A.G. for the State, Md. M. Khan, A.S.G.I. for the Union of India and Mr. A.K. Pandey, Advocate for the J.S.P.C.B., for the Respondent

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Hon''ble Mrs. Justice Poonam Srivastav

1. When the writ petition was taken up for final hearing, the petitioner''s counsel prayed for time to file a rejoinder affidavit, which was vehemently

opposed by the counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. As agreed

between the respective Counsel on behalf of the petitioners, Advocate General, Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Pollution Control Board

and the Central Pollution Control Board, this writ petition is being decided finally.

2. In certain cases, there was an objection raised by the Forest Department that the crushers are installed within the prohibited area of the Forest

and, therefore, running of Iron Ore Crushers cannot be allowed.

3. Submission is that No Objection Certificate is already granted in favour of the units and, therefore, they are also liable to be allowed to function

after fulfilling the conditions imposed on similarly placed Iron Ore Crushers. An undertaking has already been given in the form of affidavits filed by

the petitioners.

4. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the order passed in M/s Shree Ram Metallic Vs. Union of India & Ors. along with the other writ

petitions are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and, therefore, the petitioners are entitled to run their crushers on the same terms

and conditions.

5. The State Government imposed restriction and cancelled the consent from further running of the Iron Ore Crushers because of pollution of the

environment. Restrictions were imposed by the Central Pollution Control Board. The crusher owners approached this Court by filing writ petitions.

Interim orders were granted by this Court on the basis of which Iron Ore Crushers continued to function. During the pendency of the writ petition,

the Central Pollution Control Board issued notification whereby certain conditions were imposed for adopting safety measures subject to which the

Iron Ore Crushers could be granted permission to function provided they were operating since before. An order was passed on 19.10.2011

requiring the petitioners to file an affidavit to the effect that they would take steps to fulfill the conditions imposed by the Central Pollution Control

Board to ensure that running of Iron Ore Crusher do not cause any health hazard. The conditions are enumerated here-in-below:-

I. Providing permanent boundary wall is constructed all around the iron ore crushing units.

II. Paved internal roads and roads around units are made.

III. Comprehensive enclosures of crusher and screen units with vent attached with PCDs are installed.

IV. Submission of information to JSPCB on source of raw material, quantity processed daily, dispatched and destination on monthly basis to keep

vigil on illegal mining is submitted and

V. There shall be no objection certificate from the Forest Department, if not already granted earlier.

6. The condition No. 1, providing permanent boundary wall is constructed all around the iron ore crushing units, Condition No.2, Paved internal

roads and roads around units are made and Condition No.4, submission of information to JPSCB on source of raw material, quantity processed

daily, dispatched and destination on monthly basis to keep vigil on illegal mining shall be complied with by the respective petitioners latest by

30.06.2012. So far the Condition No.3 regarding PCDs attached with the screen units with vents to the crusher is concerned, the petitioners are

required to approach the manufacturers within 10 days as per the approved specification of the PCDs. The manufacturers shall endeavour to

provide PCDs within a period of one month which shall be produced before the appropriate authority for grant of approval. The concerned

authority shall complete the formalities within two weeks thereafter and installation will be made within two weeks from the date of grant of

approval. Thus, compliance of Condition No.3 shall be completed within 2 1/2 months to ensure that all the precautions for control of pollution as

provided by the Central Pollution Control Board will be completed within a period of 2 1/2 months.

7. Period of two months provided for complying Condition Nos. 1, 2 & 4 will be concurrent with the period provided to the petitioners to take

steps for compliance of Condition No.3.

8. In the event compliance is made of the aforesaid condition by the Iron Ore Crushers, N.O.C. granted by the State Pollution Control Board will

not be withdrawn by the respondents.

8. During the intervening period while the petitioners complete the requirements of the notification within the time frame fixed here-in-above, the

crushers will continue to function for a period of three months from today. With these observations, all the writ petitions stand disposed of.