WP/24207/2004 of M/s. Shanti Alloys Private Limited, Vs A.P. Pollution Control Board, on 29 December 2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA,THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NARAYANA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO : 24207 of 2004

Between:

M/s. Shanti Alloys Private Limited, Plot No.57, Industrial Estate, Thumakunta (V), Hindupur (M), Anantapur District, Rep. by its managing Director, Athaur Rahman.

..... PETITIONER

AND

1 A.P. Pollution Control Board, Paryavaran Bhavan, A-3, I.E., Sananthnagar, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Member Secretary.

2 The Joint Chief Environmental Engineer, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Zonal Office, Nampally, Hyderabad.

3 The Superintending Engineer, Operation, Central Power Distribution Companyof A.P. Limited, A.P. Transco, Ananthapur district, Anantapur.

4 The Divisional Engineer, Operation, Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited, A.P. Transco, Hindupur, District Anantapur.

.....RESPONDENT(S)

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the order No.442/PCB/TF-HYD/2004-3244 dated 14-12-2004of the 1st respondent as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust contrary to the Principles ofNatural Justice and Section 21 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order or orders.Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.V.NAGARJUNA BABUCounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: MR.E.KALYAN RAMCounsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4: Smt. M. Vinobha DeviThe Court made the following Oral Order: (per Sri Devinder Gupta, CJ)

Though, against the order impugned in the writ petition dated 14.12.2004, passed bythe 1[st] respondent-Board, appeal is provided, but, challenge here is violation ofprinciples of natural justice.

Notice for legal hearing was served upon the petitioner of which petitioner gotinformation through EE, A.P.P.C.B./Kurnool and immediately on 27.11.2004, requestin writing was submitted by the petitioner expressing its inability to appear on29.11.2004 with a request to give some other reasonable date. The grievance of thepetitioner is that the respondent-Board instead of doing so, passed the impugnedorder.

When the law provides for providing legal hearing, it is not a mere formality, but, is astatutory requirement, which has to be complied with. May be that according to theBoard, despite show cause notice, the petitioner has not made any compliance, butbefore passing any final order, it is absolutely mandatory to provide legal hearingand in the instant case, a short notice of two days was given and when adjournmentwas sought to give a reasonable time, hurriedly, the impugned order was passed.There being thus violation of principles of natural justice, the writ petition is allowed.The impugned order is set aside. The petitioner will appear before the Task Force Committee of the 1[st] respondent-Board at Hyderabad on 18.1.2005 for legalhearing. Thereafter, the respondent-Board will proceed to take appropriate decisionin accordance with law.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.

______________________

DEVINDER GUPTA, CJ

Date: 29[th] December, 2004

_______________________M. NARAYANA REDDY,J

Pnb

To

1 The Member Secretary, A.P. Pollution Control Board, ParyavaranBhavan, A-3, I.E., Sananthnagar, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Chief Environmental Engineer, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Zonal Office, Nampally, Hyderabad.

3 The Superintending Engineer, Operation, Central Power DistributionCompany of A.P. Limited, A.P. Transco, Ananthapur district, Anantapur.

4 The Divisional Engineer, Operation, Central Power Distribution

Conclusion

Company of A.P. Limited, A.P. Transco, Hindupur, District Anantapur.

5 Two C.D. copies