The second respondent issued a show cause notice dated 17.02.2012. Therein the second respondent informed that the petitioner was constructing the rice mill without obtaining the consent for establishment (CFE) as required under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (the Water Act), and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (the Air Act). The petitioner was also informed that the Officials of the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) visited the Unit on 13.02.2012 and advised her to stop the construction. Therefore, the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why action should not be taken under Section 31A of the Air Act in the interest of public health and environment for causing air pollution. The petitioner sent a representation on 05.03.2012. Inter alia she contended that as she applied for necessary permission to DIC under single window system she was under bona fide impression that all permissions would be granted, and indeed, she claimed that all permissions were granted. After considering the explanation, the Joint Chief Environmental Engineer, APPCB, issued closure order, dated 06.03.2012, under Section 31A of the Air Act and Section 33A of the Water Act. The petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court to assail the closure order.
