This is an appeal against the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board's order granting renewal of consent to an industry. The court held that since the appellant admitted the unit is not in operation and vacated the premises, the appeal is dismissed.
The appeal No.50 of 2024(SZ) is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Item No.01:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Friday, the 02nd day of August, 2024.
(Through Video Conference)
Appeal No.50 of 2024(SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
...Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s): M/s. W.M. Abdul Majeed, W.M. Abdul Azeez & S. Silambarasan
For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for Tamil Nadu PCB.
CORAM :
HON’BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
Page 1 of 2
JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is directed against the order of the Appellate Authority dated 20.09.2023. The said appeal itself was filed aggrieved by the grant of the renewal of the consent subject to the conditions given therein.
2. One of the conditions imposed by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) is that the unit has to convert the industry from using crude oil to diesel/gas. However, the industry had represented before the Appellate Authority that they were not in a position to erect the combustion engine with the aid of diesel/gas, as they are financially constrained for the present.
3. The Appellate Authority, therefore, had observed that as and when the appellant switches over to diesel/gas engines or with any other modern technology, the TNPCB can examine and grant consent.
4. It is also now stated that the unit is not in operation, which is admitted by the appellant as well. The learned counsel appearing for the TNPCB would state that the unit itself has vacated from the premises.
5. In view of the above, the appellant cannot be aggrieved by the order impugned.
6. Hence, the appeal [Appeal No.50 of 2024(SZ)] is dismissed.
Sd/-
Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM
Sd/Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM
Appeal No.50/2024(SZ) 02nd August, 2024. AD.
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant is aggrieved by the grant of renewal of consent to the non-operational industry subject to conditions.
M. Padmavathi
U. Pichaiyya
The Hon'ble Appellate Authority, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board
The District Environmental Engineer
M/s. Kumaran Metal Industries
Pushpa Sathyanarayana
Satyagopal Korlapati
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal before a tribunal against an order of a statutory authority.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
