Bhagwan Das Gupta, J. - (1.) The applicants stand convicted for the offence punishable u/S. 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for breach of the provisions contained in S. 12 of the Act read with R. 18 of the UP Factories Rules, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The sentence awarded is fine in a sum of Rs. 250/ - each. The order also contains certain directions for future which need not be reproduced for the purposes of this judgment. The applicants are Manager and occupier of Mrs. Ganesh Sugar Mills Ltd., Anand Nagar in the district of Gorakhpur which manufactures sugar. The aforesaid factory was in existence on the date of the enforcement of the Rules framed under the Act. As required by cl. (7) of R. 18, the factory submitted to the Effluent Board, constituted by the State Government, an application detailing the arrangement etc. which were in existence for the disposal of effluents, for approval by the Effluent Board. The Effluent Board did not approve the arrangement and made suggestions to the factory from time to time as to the manner in which the factory should dispose of the effluents, but the factory does not appear to have complied with the suggestions and ultimately, on the 2nd of February, 1968, one Sri B.L. Shukla, Inspector of Factories inspected the factory and subsequently filed a complaint in consequence of which the applicants were convicted and sentenced as above. The complaint was to the effect that the Management had failed to make effective arrangement for the disposal of factory effluents and waste emanating due to the manufacturing process carried on in the factory, that the Management had not made proper arrangements for improving the standard of the factory effluents to the limits approved by the Effluent Board, that inspite of the fact that the Management had been given instructions for improvement in the manner of disposal of the factory effluents and allowed sufficient time for carrying out the same, the Factories Inspector had found, in the course of his inspection, on the 2nd of February, 1968 that the effluents were being discharged without effecting any improvement, and was a source of nuisance. Correspondence in support of the background set forward in the complaint was filed in court and the only witness examined at the trial was Sri Banwari Lal Shukla, Inspector of Factories, who stated that when he visited the factory on the 2nd of February, 1968 he found that manufacturing process was going on in the factory and sugar was being manufactured, but there was no effective arrangement for disposal of effluents notwithstanding the fact that the Effluent Board had refused to approve the arrangement in existence.
(2.) It may be added here that in the course of their statements, the applicants made the assertion that the existing arrangement was an effective arrangement for the disposal of wastes and effluents. The court below appears to have taken the view that disapproval by the Effluent Board of the existing arrangement and failure on the part of the applicants to file any appeal to the State Government against the decision of the Effluent Board led to the result that the applicants, in continuing to discharge the effluents in the manner disapproved by the Effluent Board, were guilty of a breach of S. 12 of the Act read with R. 19 of the Rules, punishable u/S. 92 of the Act.
(3.) In order to appreciate the contention raised by learned counsel for the applicants, it appears necessary to set forward the relevant provisions in the Act and the Rules. S. 12 of the Act runs as follows: - -? 12. Disposal of wastes and effluent. - (1) Effective arrangements shall be made in every factory for the disposal of wastes and effluents due to the manufacturing process carried on therein. (2) The State Government may make rules prescribing the arrangements to be made u/sub -S. (1) or requiring that the arrangements made in accordance with sub -S. (1) shall be approved by such authority as may be prescribed. Cl. (1) of R. 18 of the Rules runs as follows: - - 18. Disposal of trade waste and effluents. -(1) The arrangement made in accordance with sub -S. (1) of S. 12 for the disposal of effluent shall be approved by the Effluent Board constituted by the State Govt. for the purpose. Cl. (2) lays down the constitution of the Effluent Board, cls. (3), (4), (5) and (6) provide for the terms of office of the members of the Board, their traveling allowance and meetings of the Board. Cl. (7), which is relevant for the purpose of this decision, runs as follows: - - (7) Every Factory in existence on the date of the enforcement of this rule shall submit to the Board an application, along with detailed plans of the arrangements proposed to be made, or in existence, in accordance with sub -S. (1) of S. 12 within 3 months from the date of enforcement of this rule. Cl. (8) provides for the documents which are required to accompany the application made u/Cl. (7). Cl. (9) deals with factories to be installed or registered and licensed after the enforcement of the rule and cl. (10) provides the Board with the power to call for such information as it considered necessary for consideration of an application by a factory etc. Cl. (11) provides that if the Board approves the arrangements, the plans in duplicate shall be returned to the factory, duly signed (by the Secretary on behalf of the Board. Cl. (12) deals with the manner of correspondence whereas cl. (13) provides the Board the power to visit factories for the purposes of inspecting the arrangements. Cl. (14), which is the last clause, runs as follows: - - (14) The Manager, or the occupier, of the factory may; within thirty days of the date of the decision of the Board, appeal against it to the State Government whose order shall be final.;