AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 394 wordsThis petition has been filed in public interest alleging that the Industries all over the State of Jharkhand have been set up which emit hazardous gas creating pollution and hence an enquiry/investigation be made to identify all existing polluting industries consuming coal and coke and all these industries are running without following any statutory clearance and no objection certificate.
Having heard the petitioner in person as also on perusing the petition, we find that the petition is extremely vague as no clear identification and names of the industries have been specified which are polluting A blanket order stopping the running of all industries cannot be passed without clearly indicating as to what are the nature of hazardous substance and what illegality have been committed by them.
However, we grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the State Pollution Control Board and furnish the specific names of the industries and nature of the pollution caused by these industries as also other illegalities if any. which have been committed by them and if such an application is tiled, the Pollution Control Board shall examine all these aspects and pass a reasoned order on the same. Thereafter if the petitioner is aggrieved, by the order of the State Pollution Control Board, he would be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition challenging the orders on legally sustainable grounds as in absence of any specific pleadings, it is not possible for this Court to redress the issue raised. If the petitioner approaches the State Pollution Control Board, it is further expected to examine the matter and take steps if necessary to ensure that the industries are putting enough check and balance so that the pollution is controlled. We reiterate that the petitioner may file a fresh petition if necessary with specific pleadings in regard to the allegation and issues which he has raised. In so far as this petition is concerned, it Is rejected as it is non-specific and the allegations are absolutely vague. Besides this, the Petitioner has not even impleaded the Industries which, according to him, are creating pollution all over the State and in absence of the necessary parties and without granting opportunity of hearing to them straightaway an order of shifting and closure of all the Industries cannot be passed.
This petition is dismissed subject to the aforesaid liberty.
