DAYANIDHI VENTURES PVT. LTD Vs. MEGHALAYA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner company on being aggrieved with the action of the respondents more particularly the respondent No. 1, the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board which by notice dtd. 20/10/2021 had directed the petitioner company to pay Environmental Compensation for alleged operation of a quarry without consent to establish or operate. The case of the petitioner is that it does not possess any stone quarry and nor have they applied for one and nor have they operated any such quarry.

(2.) Dr. B.P.Todi, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been compelled to come before this Court seeking invocation of Article 226 of the Constitution in view of the fact that there has been a blatant violation of the Principles of Natural Justice by the respondents in levying the penalty of Rs.69,90,000.00 (Rupees Sixty-Nine lakhs, ninety thousand) only, by way of Environmental Compensation for purported illegal operation of the stone crusher stone quarry. Learned Sr. counsel submits that the petitioner was served with a show cause notice dtd. 24/11/2020, alleging that the petitioner as per a report which had been submitted by the respondent No. 3, was operating a stone quarry without lawful authority. Further he submits, that the said notice also stated that as per the order passed by the National Green Tribunal in Original Application No. 48/2019 (EZ), the National Green Tribunal had directed the State Government to assess the Environmental Compensation against the illegal mines. Learned Sr. counsel submits that the amount of Rs.69,90,000.00 (Rupees Sixty-Nine lakhs, ninety thousand) only, had been assessed as Environmental Compensation and no basis as to how the calculation was arrived at was furnished, to the petitioner.

(3.) The learned Sr. counsel submits that a show cause reply was filed on 31/8/2021 to the notice dtd. 24/11/2020 denying the allegations made therein, by maintaining that the petitioner company did not own or operate any stone quarry in the area mentioned in the said notice, or for that matter in any other part of Meghalaya. Learned Sr. counsel further submits that a request was also made for the petitioner to be given a hearing and to drop the proceedings imposing Environmental Compensation, as the inspection report which according to the respondent No.1 was a basis for levying Environmental Compensation, was not enclosed with the show cause and nor was the petitioner given the calculation as to how such a huge amount had been arrived at as Environmental Compensation. This the learned Sr. counsel contends, has resulted in the violation of the Principles of Natural Justice and inspite of repeated requests the respondent No.1 overlooked the same, as also the show cause reply dtd. 31/8/2021.