The appellant undertook a project of developing a housing colony at Gurgaon- Sohna Road, Sector 48, Gurgaon, Haryana.
On 29 December 2015, the Board issued a show cause notice of closure under Section 33-A of the Water Act and Section 31-A of the Air Act.
In January 2018, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority established under the Air and Water Acts by invoking Section 31 of the Air Act and Section 28 of the Water Act for setting aside the order dated 21 June 2017 passed by the Chairman of the Board granting approval to prosecute the appellant.
He submitted that even assuming without admitting that the EC expired on 9 April 2012, renewal or grant of a fresh EC was not required as the superstructure of the building was complete before 9 April 2012, and for completing the further construction, EC was not required. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant further submitted that once ex-post facto CTE was granted, even if the appellant conducted certain activities before the grant of ex- post facto CTE which required CTE, the appellant cannot be prosecuted as in this case, there is not a mere grant of CTE but the same will have retrospective effect. Therefore, the only issue in the appeal preferred before the NGT was regarding the legality and validity of the order of the Appellate Authority and the approval granted on 21 June 2017 to prosecute the appellant.
Considering the limited scope of appeal, NGT ought not to have gone into the question of whether the construction carried out by the appellant between 9 April 2012 to 29 August 2017 was illegal.
The relevant part of the said office order reads thus: “The agenda regarding Ex-post facto Consent to Establish was placed before the Board in its 181 meeting held on 08.02.12 vide agenda item No 161.18.
The appellant did not challenge the Board’s decision dated 8 February 2012, authorising the Board to grant ex-post facto CTE, which clearly provided that simultaneously with the grant of ex-post facto CTE, action would be taken against the unit which violated the provisions of the 9 Air/Water Acts by not obtaining prior CTE, as a past violation.
It is pertinent to note that the appellant not only failed to make any grievance about condition no.4 in the ex-post facto CTE dated 18 October 2017 but acted upon the es-post facto CTE.
Case Title: M/S SWETA ESTATE PVT. LTD. GURGAON Vs. HARYANA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
Case Number: C.A. No.-002212 / 2020
