Allowed

Rajat Chowdhury v. the State of West Bengal

NGT9 Jul 2024Original Application No. 87/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal disposed of an application by a co-owner of a residential building alleging noise and chemical pollution from a furniture manufacturing unit. Finding the unit lacked a Consent to Operate, the Tribunal directed an immediate cessation of operations until compliance is achieved.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Respondent Unit to cease operations with immediate effect until it obtains a Consent to Operate from the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

Rajat Chowdhury vs the State of West Bengal — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.04

¶2

Court No.1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA

¶4

(THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

¶5

Original Application No.87/2024/EZ

¶6

IN THE MATTER OF :

¶7

Rajat Chowdhury, S/o Nikhil Chowdhury, R/o 105, Neogi Para Road (now known as ‘Manik Bandyopadhyay Sarani’), Flat No.202, 2^nd Floor, P.O. & P.S.-Baranagar, Kolkata, Pin – 700036,

¶8

…Applicant(s)

¶9

Versus

¶10

1. The State of West Bengal, Through its Principal Secretary, Department of Environment, Government of West Bengal, Prani Sampad Bhawan, 10A, Block-LB, Sector-III, Bidhannagar, Kolkata, Pin – 700106,

¶11

2. The West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary, Department of Environment, Government of West Bengal, Prani Sampad Bhawan, 10A, Block-LB, Sector-III, Bidhannagar, Kolkata, Pin – 700106,

¶12

3. The Senior Scientist, West Bengal Pollution Control Board, 10A, Block-LB, Sector-III, Bidhannagar, Kolkata – 700106,

¶13

4. The Directorate of Micro Small Medium Enterprise, Through its Director, New Secretariat Building, 1, Kiran Sankar Roy Road, Kolkata – 700001,

¶14

5. The General Manager, District Industrial Centre, Barasat, 12, K.B. Basu Road, Rail Gate, Kathgola, Barasad, Pin – 700126,

¶15

6. The Superintendent of Police, Barrackpore Commissionerate, Q958+QJH, Cantonment, Barrackpore,

¶16

¶17

Barrackpore Cantonment, West Bengal, Pin – 700120,

¶18

7. The Chairperson, Baranagar Municipality, 87, Deshbandhu Road, East Kolkata,

¶19

Pin – 700035,

¶20

8. The Officer-in-Charge, Baranagar Police Station, 47, Barrackpore Trunk Road, Netaji Colony, Baranagar, Kolkata, Pin – 7000901,

¶21

9. Sri Sikandar Sharma, S/o Laddu Sharma, R/o 128, S.P. Banerjee Road, Kolkata, P.O.-Alambazar, P.S.-Baranagar, District – 24 Parganas (North), Pin – 700035,

¶22

10. M/s Nirman Construction,

¶23

A Partnership Firm, Registered Office at 13-F/6, Bhattacharjee Para Lane, P.O.+P.S.-Baranagar, Kolkata – 700036,

¶24

…Respondent(s)

¶25

Date of hearing: 09.07.2024

¶26

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶27

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Priyabrata Thakur, Advocate

¶28

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sibojyoti Chakraborty, Advocate for R-1,4,5,6 & 8, Mr. Dipanjan Ghosh, Advocate for R-7, Mr. Ashish Bhattacharya, Advocate for R-9,

¶29

ORDER

¶30

Mr. Priyabrata Thakur, learned Counsel is present for the Applicant.

¶31

Affidavit dated 18.06.2024 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No.4, Micro Small Medium Enterprise and Textile Department, Government of West Bengal; the same is taken on record.

¶32

¶33

Affidavit dated 21.06.2024 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos.2&3, West Bengal Pollution Control Board; the same is taken on record.

¶34

Mr. Sibojyoti Chakraborty, learned Counsel files Vakalatnama on behalf of the Respondent No.1, 4, 5, 6 & 8, State Respondents, Government of West Bengal; the same is taken on record.

¶35

Mr. Dipanjan Ghosh, learned Counsel files Vakalatnama on behalf of the Respondent No.7, Baranagar Municipality; the same is taken on record.

¶36

The present Original Application has been filed by the Applicant stating that he is a co-owner along with the Respondent No.9 of the multi-storeyed residential building situated at Premises No.105, Manik Bandyoipadhyay Road (formerly known as ‘Neogi Para Road Kolkata – 700036’), P.S.-Baranagar, Kolakta.

¶37

It is stated that the Respondent No.9 on 15.01.2018 by a registered Deed of Conveyance purchased from the Developer (Respondent No.10 herein), one Shop Room No.G-3A, on the ground floor, north side of the building known as ‘105, Manik Bandyopadhyay Sarani, Kolkata’. It is stated that the property was sold to the Respondent No.9 only for the purpose of selling his goods from the shop room and not to use the same as a manufacturing Unit by using grinder machines, drilling machines and using chemical hazardous substances, more so, since a condition was also imposed upon him that he cannot carry out any trade or business of offensive and unethical nature pursuit which may create nuisance, annoyance or danger to the owners or successor in title or to the owners or cobuyers of other flats.

¶38

¶39

It is alleged that the Respondent No.9 started the business in the name of ‘Ayush Yaman Furniture’ converting the shop into a manufacturing Unit without valid license. It is also alleged that the work in the said shop is carried out from about 09:00 AM to 11:00 PM at night using different types of grinding machines, drilling machines and wood cutting machines which is making enormous unbearable sound throughout the day and he and his co-workers are also using toxic chemicals for their products causing irritation in the eyes and nose of the residents of the said building and other persons coming to the building.

¶40

It is stated that the Applicant lodged a complaint before the Senior Scientist, West Bengal Pollution Control Board, on 17.03.2023, on which the State Board directed the Officer-in-Charge, Baranagar Police Station, vide letter dated 31.05.2023 with a copy to Regional Office, Barrackpore, to examine the matter but it is stated that thereafter nothing has been done till date.

¶41

The Officer-in-Charge, Baranagar Police Station, Respondent No.8, has filed affidavit dated 05.04.2024, stating that the matter was enquired by the official of the Baranagar Police Station on 02.05.2024 in which it was found that Sri Sikander Sharma, Respondent No.9, has a valid trade license issued by the Baranagar Municipality being Certificate No.0917P20123137613 dated 12.06.2023 valid upto 11.06.2024 and he is also a handicapped person having a certificate issued by Dr. B. N. Bose, S. D. Hospital, Barrackpore, District-North 24 Parganas. However, in view of the allegations made in the present Original Application, the official of the Baranagar Police Station directed the Respondent No.9 to take

¶42

¶43

immediate precautions against air and noise pollution caused by the shop being operated by him at the site in question.

¶44

The Micro Small Medium Enterprise and Textile Department, Government of West Bengal, Respondent No.4, has filed affidavit dated 18.06.2024, stating that the Respondent No.9 has a valid trade license in its favour granted by the Baranagar Municipality for Workshop/Factory of Non-Food items/Furniture Maker and the Unit of Respondent No.9 also has UDYAM-WB registration wherein the activity is shown as ‘manufacture of furniture’, copy of the trade license has been filed as Annexure-R-2 (page 115) with the affidavit. 12. The West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Respondent Nos.2&3, has filed affidavit dated 21.06.2024, stating that in pursuance of the directions of this Tribunal the officials of the State Board visited the site of M/s Ayush Yaman Furniture, located at 105, Neogi Para Road, Baranagar Police Station, Kolkata, on 02.05.2024 and the following observations and remarks were made which are as under:-

¶45

“ Observation :

¶46

This is a tiny unit situated in a small room (6 feet X 10 feet) at the front side of the ground floor of the building (G+4) along with other shops. The unit has one drilling m/c, one planner and one wood cutter. All the machines are electrically operated. In front of the building approx. 20 feet wide Neogi para road is there.

¶47

During inspection the unit was found to be in operation. Only hand polishing (Varnish) activity was going on. No sound generating activity was going on during inspection. The undersigned met with Mr. Rajat Chowdhury, Applicant who resides at the 2^nd floor of the said building. He said that they are suffering mainly from sound & dust generated from the operation of the unit. He also said that last two or three days the unit has stopped the sound generating activity. He stated that the chemical (varnish) which is used in

¶48

¶49

process of the unit, causes irritation in the eyes and nose. There is a chance of noise and spreading of dust during cutting of wooden blocks by electric wood cutter m e and electrically operated planner m/c.

¶50

The unit has obtained trade license from Baranagar Municipality, which is valid upto 11^th June, 2024, but the unit does not possess Consent to Operate of the State Board.

¶51

Remarks :

¶52

Earlier, on the basis of complaint lodged by Mr. Rajat Chowdhury, the State Board issued a letter to the Baranagar Police Station vide memo no. 602-PG/1.10/03/2020 dated 31.05.2023 with a request to see that the unit runs only after obtaining necessary statutory license including valid trade license and Consent to Operate of the State Board. However, during inspection it was observed that the unit is operating without obtaining Consent to Operate of the State Board.”

¶53

We find that the Inspection Report, copy of which has been extracted in the Record of Proceedings dated 03.06.2024 (Annexure-R2 to the affidavit), mentions that the Respondent No.9 Unit has a trade license issued by the Baranagar Municipality valid upto 11.06.2024 but the Unit does not possess a Consent to Operate of the State Board. The Report further shows that the Applicant resides on the 2^nd floor of the building and on the date of inspection the Unit was found to be in operation but only hand polishing (varnish) activity was going on. There was no sound generating activity but there was a chance of noise and spreading of dust during cutting of wooden blocks by electric cutter and electrically operated planner.

¶54

In view of the fact that the Unit does not have a Consent to Operate, the State Board in the proceedings held on 27.05.2024, in which the Complainant as well as the Respondent No.9 were

¶55

¶56

present, has passed an order directing that M/s Ayush Yaman Furniture shall not operate any manufacturing activity without obtaining Consent to Operate of the State Board beyond 31^st July, 2024.

¶57

The Respondent No.9, Mr. Sikandar Sharma, has filed affidavit dated 08.07.2024, stating that the said Respondent is operating the business of wooden furniture under the name and style ‘Ayush Yaman Furniture’ and after making wooden furniture the same is sold to the purchaser. It is stated that the Unit has a valid trade license issued by the Baranagar Municipal Corporation since 2018. It is also stated that the Unit of Respondent No.9 is carrying the business of wooden furniture as permissible under the law and that the present Original Application has been filed by the Applicant out of grudge. The complaint Docket No.PCB7284, notice issued on 07.05.2024 and the record of proceedings dated 27.05.2024 and order passed therein is not disputed.

¶58

Along with the documents appended to the affidavit, an application for Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate has been filed as Annexure-P-4, the current status of which is shown as ‘Pending’ as on 18.06.2024.

¶59

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. Mr. Asish Bhattacharya, learned Counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the Respondent No.9.

¶60

The Inspection Report of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board shows that the Unit in question does not have a valid Consent to Operate issued by the State Board; noise pollution has been alleged by the Applicant and since the Unit of Respondent No.9 has a trade license for manufacturing of furniture issued by the Baranagar

¶61

¶62

Municipality, the use of electric cutters for cutting of wooden blocks and electrically operated planners would certainly cause noise pollution. We have perused the copy of Trade License (page 115) and find that the activity mentioned therein is ‘manufacture of furniture’. The Applicant has also alleged that the varnish used by the Respondent No.9 cause irritation in the eyes and nose.

¶63

We also find that the West Bengal Pollution Control Board has directed that the Unit of Respondent No.9 shall not operate any manufacturing activity without obtaining Consent to Operate of the State Board beyond 31^st July, 2024 . We are of the view that if the West Bengal Pollution Control Board finds the Unit of Respondent No.9 to be operating in violation of the mandatory Consents/CTE/CTO of the State Board, the State Board shall direct the Unit of Respondent No.9 to stops its operations forthwith and a direction to stop operations from a future date would only lead to continuous pollution and day to day violation of environmental norms.

¶64

We dispose of the present Original Application with a direction that the Respondent No.9 Unit shall cease its operations with immediate effect which shall remain valid till such time that the Unit does not obtain a Consent to Operate of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

¶65

The West Bengal Pollution Control Board shall also, while considering the case of the Respondent No.9 Unit for grant of Consent to Operate, if any application to that effect is filed by the concerned Unit before the State Board, ensure that the sound generated by the electric wooden cutter and electrically operated

¶66

¶67

planner is within the permissible limits under the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.

¶68

The West Bengal Pollution Control Board shall also ensure that the use of varnish in the manufacturing of furniture by the Respondent No.9 Unit shall be such that it does not offend the eyes and nose.

¶69

I.As., if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

¶70

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶71

B. Amit Sthalekar, JM

¶72

Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM

¶73

July 09, 2024, Original Application No.87/2024/EZ AK

¶74

Rajat Chowdhury v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajat Chowdhury v. the State of West Bengal

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

Dastak Face the Truth vs State of Rajasthan through Department of Mines and Petroleum

Dastak Face the Truth vs State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary Department of Mines Petroleum

Dastak Face the Truth vs State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary Department of Mines Petroleum

Gurudwara Manak Tabra Prabandhan Committee through Its President Sh Tara Singh Son Sh Jhanda Singh vs State of Haryana

M Thilakraj vs

Rajendra Singh vs

Rajesh Kumar Dokwal vs

Raj Kumar vs Union of India

Subhash Datta vs State of West Bengal

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 21/2024 in Original Application No. 79/2023 of Sri Sandip Mitra vs Department of Environment and Climate Change

News Report Published in the Hindu Dated 28 08 2023 Titled Eight Killed in Blast at Illegal Fireworks Unit in West Bengal vs State of West Bengal

Kartik Majumder vs Department of Environment

News Item Titled Six Workers Killed in Fire Inside Nagaland Rat Hole Coal Mine Appearing in the Hindu Bureau Date 27 01 2024 vs Nagaland Pollution Control Board