Allowed

M/s. Sri Mallikarjuna Stone Crushing Industries, v. The Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar

Telangana HC14 Feb 2011CRLRC/2384/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court revised an order prohibiting stone crushing operations due to environmental defects. It upheld the suspension but directed the petitioner to renew an expired environmental consent order under Water and Air Acts before resuming activities.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to renew the expired Environmental Consent Order and produce it to resume crushing activities.

M/s. Sri Mallikarjuna Stone Crushing… — Mining and Natural Resources | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:2384 OF 2010

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 25.8.2010 of the Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Kamanpur Mandal, prohibiting the petitioner and certain others from carrying out the crushing operations until they rectify the defects pointed out in the said order.

¶4

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of a stone crushing unit and is carrying on crushing operations in Survey No. 411 of Begumpet Village, Kamanpur Mandal, without taking any precautionary measures.

¶5

On receiving the said information from the villagers and ryots and as the same is hazardous to health and physical comfort of the persons residing within the said area, the Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Kamanpur Mandal, the respondent herein, passed an interim order on 2.8.2010 directing the petitioner not to conduct crushing operations in Survey No.411. Further, the petitioner was directed to appear on 18.8.2010 along with documentary evidence pertaining to the defects pointed out in the said order, including the Explosive Licence. Pursuant to which, the petitioner appeared before the respondent and produced the relevant material. After holding enquiry, the respondent passed the impugned order under Section 138(2) read with 133(b) of the Cr.P.c. prohibiting the petitioner from carrying on the said activities until the defects pointed out therein, are rectified. Hence, the present revision.

¶6

The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner though rectified all the defects mentioned in the said order, but however, in a routine and mechanical manner, the

¶7

respondent passed the impugned order as passed in respect of other stone crushing units.

¶8

Heard.

¶9

The defects that were pointed out by the respondent in the order dated 2.8.2010 are as follows:

¶10

“c) Have not provided the blower system to extract the dust from screening

¶11

operations.

¶12

d) No water sprinkling system is existing, if provided in one or two industries it is not adequate.

¶13

e) Ambient air quality is not put upto the limits as fixed by the A.P. Water (Prevention and control of pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. “

¶14

The petitioner offered a detailed explanation to the same and the same is as under:

¶15

“2. The Managing Parter, M/s. Mallikarjuna Stone Crushing, Begumpet

¶16

Village submitted the following documents :

¶17

1) Dy. Director of Mines & Geology, Warangal Proc. No.2216/Q2/2000, dated 25.11.2004.

¶18

2) Asst. Director of Mines & Geology, Karimnagar Lr. No. 4277/Q2/2004, dated 26.11.2004. and Proc. No. 4277/Q2/2004, dated 27.12.2004.

¶19

3) Dy.Director of Mines & Geology, Warangal Registration No. 2913/MD-2/DDWGL/2005, dated 29.1.2005.

¶20

4) Asst. Director of Mines & Geology, Karimnagar Model form for Transfer of Mining lease in Form-O.

¶21

5) Inspector of Factories, Karimnagar licence to work a factory in Form No. 4, dt. 11.7.2007.

¶22

6) Dy. Chief Inspector of Factories, Karimnagar L. No. A/554/07 along with approved plans.

¶23

7) Environmental Engineer, Ramagundam consent order for Operation No. 781/PCB/RO-RGM/2007-751, dt. 14.12.2007.

¶24

8) Affidavit dt. 31.8.2004 of N Jagadeeshwar Rao 9) Managing Partner, M/s. Mallikarjuna Stone Crusher letter

¶25

addressed to the Dist. Collector, Karimngar.

¶26

10) Managing Partner, M/s. Mallikarjuna Stone Crusher application for grant of licence to possess explosives for use.

¶27

11) R.D.O., Manthani Lr No. E/31/07, dt. 26.7.2007.

¶28

12) District Fire Officer, Warangal Lr. No. 340/DFO/07, dt. 30.5.07.

¶29

13) Asst. Commercial Tax Officer, Peddapalli Circle to Registration Certificate.

¶30

14) Sarpanch, Begumpet resolution dt. 06.10.2006.

¶31

15) Villagers and ryots of Begumpet letter to the Sarpanch and the Panchayat Secretary.

¶32

16) Certificate No. A/GBP/07, dated 25.04.07 issued by the Sarpanch and the Panchayat Secretary, Begumpet (v).”

¶33

From the above, it is clear that the petitioner has complied with all the requirements. But, it appears the Consent Order for operation issued by the Environmental Engineer expired on 31.7.2009 and the same was not renewed. In those circumstances, the petitioner is hereby directed to get the said Certificate renewed (under Water and Air Acts) and produce the same before the respondent at the earliest so that the petitioner can proceed with the crushing activity. On such production, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to carry out his crushing activities.

¶34

The revision petition is accordingly disposed of with the above directions.

¶35

______________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 14^th February, 2011

¶36

pnb

M/s. Sri Mallikarjuna Stone Crushing Industries, v. The Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sri Mallikarjuna Stone Crushing Industries, v. The Executive Magistrate cum Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Tupakula Pavan Kumar Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Kondal Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Akurathi Srinivasa Prakash Vs The State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor

Majeti Venkata Mutyala Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Avula Bhagyalakshmi Vs The State of A.P.

Peesati Nagireddy, Vs Smt. Pisati Swathi , Komatireddy Swathi, , Swathi