Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Devi Enterprises, represented by its proprietrix Smt. Sukadi Devi, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash a closure order dated 03.07.2013 passed by the Environmental Officer, Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), the first respondent. The closure order was the culmination of a complaint received on 05.02.2013 against M/s. Ambe Polymers, which was described as operating under new ownership in the name of M/s. Devi Enterprises, engaged in manufacturing injection moulded components without obtaining consent from KSPCB. After receipt of the complaint, an inspection was carried out on 14.02.2013, but the unit was not working as it had given a holiday to workers. A show-cause notice was issued on 23.02.2013, which was neither replied nor complied with. Another complaint dated 12.03.2013 was received, and a second inspection was conducted. The impugned closure order was then passed. The petitioner contended that the closure order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing and without proper show-cause notice. The court observed that the impugned order did not record any finding that the petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing or that the show-cause notice was properly served. The court held that the closure order was in violation of principles of natural justice and set it aside, remitting the matter to the first respondent for fresh consideration after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The court also directed the petitioner to file a reply to the show-cause notice within two weeks and cooperate with the proceedings.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Closure Order - Violation of Natural Justice - The impugned closure order was passed without issuing a proper show-cause notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in violation of principles of natural justice - The order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the closure order dated 03.07.2013 passed by the Environmental Officer, KSPCB, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, is sustainable in law?
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned closure order dated 03.07.2013 (Annexure-D) is set aside. The matter is remitted to the first respondent for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to file a reply to the show-cause notice within two weeks and cooperate with the proceedings.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Closure order
- Show-cause notice
- Opportunity of hearing
- Consent requirement
- Pollution control
