Disposed

Sameer Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Jan 2022CW/4545/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners objected to a bone crushing unit being set up on converted agricultural land, citing pollution and lack of safety norms. The High Court noted conflicting reports regarding nearby settlements but, finding land conversion and PCB permissions valid and no construction started, declined to entertain the petition, directing the Pollution Control Board to ensure future compliance.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; no interim orders or quashing granted. Pollution Control Board directed to ensure strict compliance of norms.

Sameer Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Environment and Pollution | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4545/2020

¶4

Sameer Khan S/o Shri Rulia Khan, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Poharaka Barani Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶5

Chirag Deen S/o Shri Yakub, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Village Poharaka Barani Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶6

Hetram S/o Shri Manful, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Poharaka Barani Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶7

Arashad Ayub S/o Shri Dalmeer Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Poharaka Barani Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶11

Sub Divisional Officer, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶12

Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Rawatsar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶13

Gram Panchayat Poharaka, Through Its Sarpanch, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

¶14

Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board (Rspcb), Through The Chairperson, Office At 4, Institutional Area, Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur.

¶15

Central Pollution Control Board (Cpcb), Through Its Chairman, Ministry Of Environment And Forest, Government Of India, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Marg, Delhi - 110032.

¶16

Raja Crushing And Fertilizer Mills, Located At Stone No. 78/51, Dhannasar Bramsar Road, Killa No. 3 To 8, Behind Induzel Pump, Village Poharaka Barani Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan Through Its Sole Proprietor Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Jaspal Singh, B/c Ramdasiya, R/o Sector-3, Hanumangarh Town, Tehsil And District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

(2 of 4)

[CW-4545/2020]

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Nikhil Dungawat
through V.C.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG
through V.C.	Mr. Baljinder Singh Sandhu
	Mr. Manish Shishodia

¶21

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶22

Order

¶23

13/01/2022

¶24

The petitioners are the residents of village Chak Poharaka Barani Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh. They are objecting to Bone Crushing Unit coming up on a land situated in the vicinity. The case of the petitioners is that the respondent no. 7 is in the process of setting up such an industry for which proper safety norms and pollution control norms have not been followed. The petitioners have raised serious objections in the manner in which the agricultural land is being converted for non-agricultural use and the permission have been granted by the concerned authorities. The basis of the petitioners’ grievance revolves around their apprehension that such a highly polluting industry is about to be set up without observing safety and pollution control norms.

¶25

On the other hand, the case of respondent no. 7 is that all necessary permissions for conversion of the land for setting up of the industry and Pollution Control Board clearances have been granted. It is only on account of political vendetta that the unit is being targeted.

¶26

It is undisputed that the respondent no. 7 has been granted permission for conversion of the land use and has also been granted permission by the Pollution Control Board to set up the

¶27

(3 of 4)

¶28

[CW-4545/2020]

¶29

industry. We notice that at one stage the Panchayat had sought to resile from the earlier permission for change of land use, however, the same has been challenged and the petition is pending before the Court and the order of the Panchayat is stayed. We also notice that the Pollution Control Board has given necessary permissions to respondent no. 7 to set up the industry. In its report dated 10^th November, 2021, the Pollution Control Board has also stated that the construction of unit has not yet been started and there is no population found in the vicinity of the site. It is stated that the nearest village is situated at a distance of about 5 to 7 kms. from the proposed site.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner however drew our attention to an affidavit filed by the State Government on 7^th December, 2021, in which the stand taken is that there are few settlements nearby the site and there is a Madrasa where young students study. However, we notice that this stand is widely different from the stand taken by the Tehsildar in his report dated 29^th November, 2019 where it is certified that the site is at a distance of about 100 meters from the highway and there are settlements which are at a distance of more than 500 meters. There is a temple situated at a distance of 1400 meters. There is no mention of any nearby village or Madrasa. The State affidavit does not explain these contradictions.

¶31

When as of now the conversion of land use is in force and the Pollution Control Board has also granted permission to set up the industry, we are not inclined to entertain this public interest petition. However, we must acknowledge that Bone Crushing industry is considered to be a highly polluting industry and we expect the Pollution Control Board to be cognizant of the potential

¶32

(4 of 4)

¶33

[CW-4545/2020]

¶34

of this industry to cause environmental damage if proper measure and pollution control means are not employed. We are informed by the counsel for the Pollution Control Board that once an industry is set up, the officers of the Pollution Control Board visits and verifies all the safety measures before the permission to start the industry is granted. We may expect that the Pollution Control Board shall ensure compliance of the pollution control norms with strictness and rigidity, as required under law.

¶35

With these observations, the petition is disposed of.

¶36

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶37

(AKIL KURESHI),CJ

¶38

54-jayesh/-

Sameer Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer Khan v. State of Rajasthan

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

Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs Manna Trust

Khurshid Ahmad Vs State of Rajasthan

Dala Ram Bhati Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan Ayurved University Vs Asha

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs H.R. Enterprises