Rajiv
Ranjan Singh v. Sate of Bihar AIR 1992 Pat 86.
Satya
Brata Sanyal & Aftab Alam, JJ
The petition was based on a report in the newspaper that M/S Shiv Shankar
Chemical Industries was polluting the environment by discharging harmful
effluents into :' the water bodies and also discharged noxious fumes.
It alleged that the Pollution Control Board was turning a blind eye to
this. The respondents to the allegation claimed that they were not causing
any pollution. The Board, however, submitted that the industry had been
asked to replace their old conventional method of treating effluents with
a modem effluent treatment plant and it had not done so.
The Court ordered an enquiry into the nature of the effluents to determine
their effect. They also ordered the firm not to release any more effluents
out of the premises of the firm. When the Expert Committees report was
placed before the Court, it held that their was sufficient evidence to
show the respondents had not stopped charging the effluents into
the water bodies and thus ordered a stay on all further manufacturing
activities by the firm. It also ordered for the constitution of a Committee
to inspect the distillery to verify if the various safety measures were
being followed.
In
the meantime, the Board refused to extend its consent to the Company under
the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,
1974 beyond September 30, 1989 as it had failed to comply with the conditions
of the earlier consent order. The Company filed a writ in Court challenging
this refusal as being arbitrary and discriminatory. The two writs were
heard together.
Shortly after this, the report of the second Committee was released. It
held that the effluents had a large quantity of B.O.D. (Biochemical Oxygen
Demand) which was fatal to marine life as on coming in 'contact with water
it absorbed all the oxygen. It also detailed the treatment of effluents
followed at the distillery and .concluded that adequate pollution control
measures were not available at the factory .On the question of pollution
already generated by the distillery, the Court held that this was more
in the nature of an irritating nuisance rather than a health hazard. It
concluded that the distillery cannot be absolved of its responsibility
of setting up the modem treatment plant but this was already under construction.
It also observed that it would take 9 months to build the new plant and
in the interim suggested certain measures, which the distillery should
adopt to check the level of pollution. The Company accepted all the recommendations
and undertook to build the new plant within 9 months.
The
Court held that their was a need to balance between the necessity to protect
the environment and the pressing need for industrialization of the State.
It agreed with the scheme suggested by the second Committee to restart
manufacturing processes with adequate safeguards. It felt that this would
be in accordance with the dicta laid down in M.C.Mehta v. Union of
India (AIR 1988SC 1037).
The Court has not only allowed the continuation of manufacturing process
but it has also imposed certain conditions on the polluting industry which
are of great importance. The conditions imposed are:
1)
the distillery must set up properly designed lagoons, double lined by
polythene shuts avoid any risk of ground water pollution having their
retaining and holding capacity equivalent to 100 days effluent discharge.
This must be to the complete satisfaction of the Board.
2)
The entire area where lagoons exist or will be further dug up the used
as storage for the effluent should be effective ly fenced to a height
of five feet by a pucca wall or 7 stand barbed wire fence to check the
entry of cattle or human beings into largoon area.
3)
The Unit should provide for centrifugal separation for the fermented sludge
so the initial stage itself and used either for cattle fed or manure.
4)
The factory should be separated by a 5 metre high and 150 metre long earthin
dyke with close plantation on the top along the slopes. This should be
able to limit the odour reaching the villagers to some extent.
5)
Two deep tube wells may be provided for the villagers at the cost of the
industry.
No comments:
Post a Comment