| File Note: |
I have examined the case. The perusal of the noting revealed that the site of the industrial unit was visited and inspected by the Assistant Environmental Engineer of the Board on 4.9.2020. The results of the effluent sample collected for monitoring purpose were found to be within the permissible limits. The analysis of stack emission sample was also found to be within the prescribed limits.
2) The installation of slope fired boiler is said to be a positive step towards the compliance of one of the directions of the Board for zero liquid discharge technology. NOC for grant installation of slope fired boiler is a separate issue and if it will help in reducing and preventing the pollution, its installation cannot be restricted in my opinion.
3) In the background of the case, it is observed that the Appellate Authority has set aside the order for refusal of consent passed by the Board. The directions issued by the Board u/s 33-A are required to be complied by the industry. The failure of the industry to comply with the said directions may invite action proportionate to the act of violation in the form of prohibition of polluting activity, prosecution, imposition of Environmental Compensation.
4) Further, it is submitted that the Board is required to pass fresh orders for consent to operate under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The directions issued by the Board u/s 33-A of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 have become final as the industry had not challenged the same by filing an appeal before the National Green Tribunal. The industry may be directed to make compliance of the said directions w.r.t the deposit of Rs. 50 lakhs as Environmental Compensation and reduction in production capacity by 30%. The grant of consent under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and grant of NOC for installation of slope fired boiler are all interlinked issues vital to the overall functioning of the industry. I am of the opinion that the industry may be afforded an opportunity of hearing before the Competent Authority of the Board, so that all the issues, which are interlinked with each other be decided on merits.
5) Opined accordingly.
|
