1. Mr.Dhiraj A.K, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.S.S.Mahendra, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr.A.Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
The petitioner is a ready mix concrete plant, solid blocks and paver blocks manufacturing unit. The petitioner was granted combined consent order dated 07.12.2021 for operation of the unit. It appears that a complaint was made against the petitioner. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a show cause notice dated 30.06.2022 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a reply to the aforesaid show cause notice on 20.07.2022. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 29.07.2022 has been passed withdrawing the consent issued to the petitioner under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Water Act’, for short) and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Air Act’, for short). Thereafter, notice under Section 33(A) of the Water Act and Section 31(A) of the Air Act was issued on 02.08.2022. The petitioner has assailed the validity of the aforesaid order and the notice in this petition
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to any representative of the petitioner before passing the impugned order dated 29.07.2022 and issuing the notice dated 02.08.2022. It is also submitted that the petitioner had sought for a copy of the inspection report which has not been supplied to it.
It is further submitted that the respondents be directed to supply a copy of the inspection report to the petitioner and to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to a representative of the petitioner and to take a decision afresh.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 – Board fairly submits that the copy of the inspection report shall be supplied to the petitioner.
4. We have considered the aforesaid submissions. The principles of natural justice are not an embodied rule. In the fact situation of the case and taking into account the drastic act which has on the operation of the petitioner - industry, in our opinion, the respondent No.2 – Board ought to have granted an opportunity of personal hearing to a representative of the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order dated 29.07.2022 and the impugned notice dated 02.08.2022 are directed to be treated as notices. The Board shall supply a copy of the inspection report to the petitioner within a period of 3 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
5. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Board on 05.09.2022 for which no notice shall be necessary. The Board, thereafter shall proceed to decide the issue in accordance with law expeditiously.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.
