Partly allowed

Md. Golab Hossain and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC11 Jul 2024WPA(P)/257/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, petitioners alleged illegal factory operation on allotted land. The court found the No Objection Certificate invalid as the land is for homestead. The court disposed of the petition, directed authorities to issue notices to shift the factory within 15 days, stop operations, and conduct a surprise inspection.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed. Respondents 4, 5, 6 directed to issue notice to Respondent 9 to shift factory within 15 days and stop operations. PCB directed to conduct surprise inspection.

Md. Golab Hossain and Ors. Vs State of West… — Environment and Pollution | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

11.07.2024 Item No.9 PG/KS Ct. No.1

¶2

W.P.A.(P) 257 of 2024

¶3

Md. Golab Hossain & Ors. Versus

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Mohinoor Rahaman Ms. Maria Rahaman Ms. Iqra Rahaman…………..for the petitioners Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi, Ld. DSGI Mr. Pradyat Saha……………for the Union of India Mr. Ashim Kr. Datta Mr. Imdadul Biswas…………for the respondent no. 6 Mr. Omar Faruk Gazi ……….for the respondent no. 9 Ms. Sonal Sinha Ms. Shabnam Farooqui……for the respondent no. 10

¶6

The petitioners by way of filing this public interest litigation allege that the respondent no. 9 is illegally running a factory for manufacturing the vessels in a land, which was allotted for the Farakka Barrage project. In this regard representations were given and since no action was taken, the writ petition was filed.

¶7

Pursuant to the leave granted by this Court, West Bengal Pollution Control Board has been added as the 10^th respondent.

¶8

The learned advocate appearing for the Pradhan viz. the 6^th respondent, on instruction, submitted that initially no objection certificate was granted in favour of the 9^th respondent to establish a factory but subsequently, on verification, it was found that no objection certificate

¶9

¶10

could not have been granted to run the factory in the particular land. In this regard, the learned advocate has referred to the revenue records to show that it is a homestead land and no industrial activity can be carried out. It is submitted that the no objection certificate, which was granted, has been cancelled by the Pradhan.

¶11

If that be the case, automatically, any permission, which has been obtained from the Pollution Control Board also deemed to have stand revoked.

¶12

Therefore, the only option available to the 9^th respondent is to shift the factory to an unobjectionable place, where such industrial activity is permitted. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of and the 4^th , 5^th and 6^th respondent are directed to issue notice to the 9^th respondent to shift the factory premises within 15 days and in the meantime, direct all operations to be stopped.

¶13

The authority of the Pollution Control Board shall also conduct a surprise inspection of the place and ensure that no industrial activity or manufacturing activity is carried on by the 9^th respondent in the land in question.

¶14

The 9^th respondent is always at liberty to locate a different unobjectionable site seeking permission from the appropriate authority and thereafter commence his project.

¶15

¶16

No costs.

¶17

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

¶18

(T.S SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶19

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

Md. Golab Hossain and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Golab Hossain and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata Vs M/S. Brinks India Pvt. Ltd.

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata Vs M/S. Ocean Shipping and Clearing Agency

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata Vs M/S. Indo Friends Agency

Ain Sahayata Kendra Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Devdutta Maji @ Devdutta Majhi Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Abdul Halim Molla Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.