The Uttarakhand High Court, while directing the Private Respondents to stop the operation of the stone crusher, directed them to approach the National Board for Wildlife (NBL) to obtain clearance for running the stoner crusher plant.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Ramesh Chandra Khulbe heard a PIL raising grievances regarding environmental pollution caused by the setting up and running of the stone crusher unit of the private Respondents (Respondent Nos. 5 & 6) .
“We are at our wits end as to how the State Government could have directed the exclusion of the State Pollution Control Board from the joint inspection process to ascertain whether any project proponent is complying with the pollution control norms. By doing so, the State Government is practically dismantling the statutory regime for protection of environment, and removing the vigilance that the State Pollution Control Board is mandated by law to maintain in the State to prevent pollution”, observed the Court while considering the PIL.
The Bench, therefore, completely disapprove of the exclusion of the State Pollution Control Board from the process of joint inspection and directed the State to ensure that the State Pollution Control Board shall be called for participation in all inspection exercises, whenever the viability of a project is being assessed from the point of view of pollution control. Any inspection reports prepared without the participation of the State Pollution Control Board shall be illegal and would not form the basis of grant of permission to either set up, or operate a polluting plant/industry , the Court ordered.
Further the Bench directed that even in cases where inspections may have been undertaken in the past, without the participation of the State Pollution Control Board, reinspection should be carried out with their participation within the next three months, and consequential action be taken on the basis of such inspection reports.
The Court asked the private respondents to apply to the National Board for Wildlife (NBL) to obtain its clearance for running its stoner crusher plant.
“The NBWL shall examine the case threadbare, and shall also examine, amongst others, the aspects taken note of in paragraph 97 hereinabove, and by a speaking order shall either grant, or refuse, its approval for the running of the stone crusher plant of Respondent Nos. 5 & 6. The NBWL shall take its decision, and communicate the same within three months from the date of this judgment.
In the event of the NBWL granting approval to the stone crusher plant of the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6, it may resume operation. On the other hand, if the NBWL refuses to grant its approval, the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 shall proceed to dismantle its stone crusher plant, and remove all its equipments and machinery from the site within two months of the order being passed by the NBWL”, the order reads.