In W.P. NO.16165 OF 2022 (GM-POL)-KAR HC- Order can be passed only on grounds mentioned in show cause notice and not on additional grounds, reaffirms Karnataka HC
Justices Alok Aradhe & Anil B. Katti [18-08-2022]

Read Order: ULLAL FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY v. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION 

LE Correspondent

Bengaluru, August 24, 2022: The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that in case an order is passed without considering the reply submitted by a party, the same will be violative of principles of natural justice.

The Division Bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil B. Katti was considering a petition filed by the petitioner-Factory  seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing of orders issued under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and under Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

The facts of the case were such that an inspection of the premises of the petitioner was conducted by the Chairman and Officers of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board . During the course of the inspection, certain deficiencies were found. Thereupon, the Environmental Officer of the Board issued a notice asking the petitioner to submit point wise compliance report failing which the petitioner was informed that action shall be taken under the Water Act and the Air Act.

The petitioner submitted a reply to the aforesaid notice. The said reply was submitted in the office but the notice for proposed directions under Section 33 of the Water Act was issued to the petitioner, who submitted a reply to the aforesaid directions.

Thereafter, a notice was issued to the petitioner by which it was asked to appear before the Chairman of the Board. The petitioner attended the aforesaid hearing. Thereafter, the impugned order was passed under the Water Act by which the petitioner was asked to close down the operation of the industry. Similarly, an order under the Air Act was passed. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition had been filed.

Referring to the judgment of the Top Court in UMC Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Food Corporation of India & Anr., the Bench said, “ It is well settled in law that if an order is beyond the scope of show cause notice or travels beyond the bounds of notice, the same is violative of principles of natural justice. In other words, an order can be passed only on the grounds mentioned in the show cause notice and not on additional grounds.”

Noting that the petitioner had filed replies to show cause notice and notice of proposed direction, the Bench opined that these replies filed by the petitioner had not been taken into consideration. The statement made by the President of the Association of the Industries during the course of hearing couldnot bind the other petitioners, held the Bench.

Thus, the Bench disposed of the petition by directing that orders passed under the Water Act and the Air Act should be treated as show cause notices and the petitioner would be granted one week’s time to file additional reply, if so advised. The Bench also asked the Board to consider the reply which may be filed on behalf of the petitioner and proceed to pass afresh order in accordance with law.