Full Text
$-
*IN THE HIGH COT]RT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUPER CASTING & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
VCTSUS
DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE
& ANR ..... ResPondents
Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Anjum Javed with Mr. Ali Afsal, Advocate for R-2
+ w.P.(c) 778u2010 & cM APPL 20r61t20L0
SUPER E,NTERPRISES ..... PEtitiONET
Through \4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
VETSUS
D]]LFII POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE
I\4/S. NAV BHARAT CASTING ..... Petitioner
Through 1\4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
2010:DHC:14066
& ANR
I\4/S. BHARAT CASTING ..... Petitioner
Advocate
IWS. SANJAY FOLINDRY Petitioner
Through \4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
VI/S. ASHA FOUNDRY ""' Petitioner
Through N4r. T.S. Ahuja with Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate ..... Respondents 7/
VCTSUS
. Through \4r. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand,
VYS. ADARSH ENTERPRISES ..... PEtitiONET
Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with \zlr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
Through Mr. Sanjeev Ralli with \zlr. Sandeep Anand, Advocate for R-1
+ w.P.(c) 778712010 & cM APPL 2016712010
VI/S. AMRIT FOUNDRY ""' Petitioner
Advocate
VETSUS
& ANR ""' ResPondents
Through \zlr. Sanjeev Ralli with Mr. Sandeep Anand, And
IWS. ASHA FOLTNDRY ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. T.S. Ahuja with \4r. Satish Kumar, Advocate
VETSUS
& ANR
JUSTICE S. MTIRALIDHAR
22.11.2010 o/o w.P.(o 7780/2010 & cM APPL 20160/2010 w.P.(o 7781/2010 & CM APPL 20161/2010 w.P.rc\ 778212010 & cM APPL20l62l20l0 w.P.(o 778312010 & cM APPL 20163/2010 w.P.(o 778412010 & cM APPL 20164/2010 w.P.(o 778sl2010 & cM APPL 2016s/2010 w.P.(o 778612010 & CM APPL 20166/2010 w.P.rc\ 775712010 & cM APPL20r67l2010 w.P.(o 7788/2010 & CM APPL 20168/2010
ORDER
1. These petitions challenge more or less similar closure orders of the Petitioners' units passed by Delhi Pollution Control Committee ('DPCC') under Section 31 (A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ('Air Act').
2. According to the DPCC these Petitioners who have been carrying on the activity of foundry for a long time are not complying with the pollution control norms. Further these foundry units are under the prohibited category of activities as per the Master Plan for Delhi 202L Inspections were carried respective inspection report on the basis of which the impugned closure or was passed.
3. In the considered view of this Court, on this short ground, that none of these Petitioners was given a copy of the inspection report, which formed the basis of the impugned direction for closure, the direction for closure cannot be sustained in law and deserves to be set aside. It is ordered accordingly.
4. The next question that arises is of the consequential.order that has to be passed. Keeping in light similar orders passed.by this Court on 19th October 2010 in Writ Petition (Civit) No. 6975 of 2010 (l(hite Machines v. DPCC) and 25th October 2010 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 710712010 (.4nupam Casting and Engineering ll/orks v. DPCC), this Court considers it appropriate to direct as under:
(i) the DPCC will treat the impugned orders in each of the cases be treated as a show cause notice issued to each of the Petitioners by the DPCC.
(ii) It will be open to the DPCC to undertake an inspectiori of the
Petitioners' premises within ten days from today without any prior intimation to the Petitioners. Any further inspection report will be goi signed by each of Petitioners and a copy furnished to each of them and an order will thereafter be passed after giving the Petitioners an opportunity of being heard. / u 4e{ I rc
(iii) In the meanwhile, it will be open to each of Petitioners to file objections to the inspection report, handed over to learned counsel for Petitioners in Court today, within one week. (i") Any consequential order that may be passed by the DPCC pursuant to the above directions will be communicated to each of Petitioners within ten days after it is passed.
(v) If aggrieved by such order, it will be open to each of the
5. It may be recorded at this stage that learned counsel for the Petitioners on instructions stated that none of Petitioners will carry on any activity in their respective foundries till 3l't December 2010 or till they receive the order of the DPCC passed in terms of this order, whichever is earlier.
6. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. The pending applications are also disposed of.
7. Order be given dasti.
NOVEMBER 22,2OIO rk \ <-/v S.MURALIDHAR,