| File Note: |
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 140%; margin: 0in 0in 6.0pt 0in;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 140%; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> The case under consideration is a tiny unit having an investment of only Rs. 9.35 Lakh (un-depreciated fixed asset) as per CA certificate dated 13.2.2023. The unit was having consent to operate under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 which expired on 30.6.2021. However, the unit is not having consent to operate under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 for which the office has calculated consent fee @ Rs. 25222/- with penalty. Consent under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 has also been applied with fee. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: PA; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> The office note reveals that the unit has now complied with the directions of the Board and has made an agreement with JBR Technology Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana for lifting of untreated effluent. The partner of the industry has requested to give relaxation in deposit of fee due to financial debt. The case has been considered on merits and In view of the facts mentioned in the case file, I recommend for grant of consent to operate to the industry under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 with suitable conditions. The industry may be allowed to deposit the consent fee in installments. The authority which has issued directions is empowered to review the same legally, if the directions are complied by the person to whom the directions have been issued. As the industry has complied with the directions of the Board, the directions issued for closure may be reviewed. The reference of political authority should not have been mentioned in the office note by the officer<sub>s</sub> of the Board as the case has to be decided in accordance with the provisions of Law and the policy of the Board. The comments are submitted for further necessary action please. </span></p> |
