- (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs:- "(1) For a declaration that (a) NOC granted by the Pollution Control Board, vide Memo No.N-84 dated 9.2.2005 under section 25 and 26 of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act and under section 21 of Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act and their subsequent renewals are illegal. (b) Emission consent order issued by Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board by Reference No.1294 dated 17.6.2005 under section 21 of the Air Act and its subsequent renewals are illegal. (c) Discharge consent orders issued under Reference No.1295 dated 17.6.2005 under section 25 and 26 of the Water Act and its subsequent renewals are illegal. (2) For a declaration that NOCs, consent orders and licenses under Factories Act to respondent no.6 in a residential area is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. (3) For a direction for dismantling and shifting of respondent no.6's unit being in contravention of Air Act, Water Act, Environment Act, Hazardous Wastes (Handling & Management) Rules and Building Bye Laws under Ranchi Regional Development Authority Act and emitting fumes causing carcinogenic effect on human body."
(2.) The factual background of this litigation is relevant. A letter dated 28.3.2007 complaining about construction of one Maruti Car Showroom and Workshop dated 28.3.2007 addressed to the then Hon'ble Chief Justice of Jharkhand was received by the High Court and on 30.3.2007, it was ordered to be placed before the Bench hearing PIL and therefore, it was registered as Public Interest Litigation being W.P (PIL) No.1785/2007. On 3.5.2007 the Division Bench headed by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice observed that the letter shows that some personal interest is also involved and therefore, directed this petition to be treated as regular writ petition (private person writ petition) and directed to post before the Single Judge having the roster of the writ petition. Faced with this situation, the author of the letter, the petitioner, moved an interlocutory application for amendment in the writ petition obviously, for the reason that the writ petition was registered on the basis of the letter to the then Hon'ble Chief Justice and detailed pleadings were not in the letter. After hearing the parties, by the order dated 16.1.2009, learned Single Judge allowed the application for amendment. In view of the above liberty to file amended petition, the petitioner filed amended writ petition and then respondents filed counter affidavit. Thereafter this petition was tagged with another PIL being W.P (PIL) No.1076/2011. In W.P(PIL) No.1076/2011, an order was passed that one I.A No.831/2011 filed in W.P(PIL) No.1076/2011 would be heard along with the present writ petition, being W.P (C) No.1785/2007 and it was also ordered that the writ petition which was registered on the basis of the letter and was converted into private interest litigation as W.P (C) No.1785/2007 would also be heard along with W.P (PIL) No.1076/2011. However, W.P (PIL) No.1076/2011 has been decided by a separate order dated 24 th August, 2011 and therefore, the present writ petition, being W.P (PIL) No.1785/2007 converted as W.P (C) No.1785/2007 and I.A No.831/2011 remain pending for decision of this Court. One another application I.A No.870/2011 was also pending which was also heard along with this writ petition.
(3.) Coming to the facts of the case, it will be appropriate to mention here that the petitioner, Dr.S.S.Narnoly, sent a letter to the High Court in the name of the then Hon'ble Chief Justice on 28.3.2007 alleging that he is a resident of purely residential area in the capital city, Ranchi, of Jharkhand State at Kanke Road and the said area also houses the residence of seniormost functionaries of the State and some of the highest dignitaries of the State are residing in the same area. It is stated therein that surprisingly in this residential area, a commercial complex in the name of Premsons Motor Maruti Udyog Pvt. Ltd. of respondent no.6, has come up. The petitioner stated in the letter that in the said commercial complex, being a Maruti showroom cum service and repair centre, the work of denting, painting and other associated works are being carried out and during denting, lot of sound is produced which is disturbing his children in their studies. The petitioner stated that he is a Surgeon and starts working early in the morning in Nagarmal Modi Seva Sadan and comes to residence at 3.00 pm for lunch for short rest and the sound emitting from the workshop is disturbing his rest and thus, the petitioner submitted that he is unable to perform his surgery properly. He also alleged that apart from sound pollution, painting of cars emits fumes of paint containing organic carbon, which spreads all around in the area including the house of the petitioner. The petitioner claimed that he being a Doctor knows that these fumes of paint are carcinogenic and may produce (i) Bronchitis, (ii) Bronchopneumonia, (iii) Bronchial asthma, (iv) Lung Cancer and (Voldemort) Cancer of Bladder. He submitted that in the interest of the health of the communities, an industry producing sound, air and water pollution must be barred from doing so in a residential area. The petitioner also submitted that he had written letter to the State Pollution Control Board and Ranchi Municipal Corporation but all in vain and therefore, proper action may be taken to safeguard the health of the community.;