M/S Ultra Conmix vs. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Ultra Conmix, a partnership firm engaged in ready-mix concrete manufacturing, filed a writ petition challenging closure directions issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) on April 19, 2025. The impugned orders directed the petitioner to close down its unit located at Survey No. 61/1 and 61/2, Seshagiri Halli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluka. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed without affording them an opportunity of being heard. The respondent-KSPCB, when questioned, could not dispute that the petitioner had not been heard prior to the issuance of the closure directions.
Held
The Court held that the observance of principles of natural justice was essential, especially when an order directs the closure of a unit, which carries severe adverse civil consequences. The petitioner was entitled to an opportunity to present its case and defend itself. Consequently, the impugned order dated April 19, 2025, was set aside solely on the ground of breach of natural justice. The Court directed that the impugned order be treated as a show cause notice, granting the petitioner two weeks to file a reply. The respondent-Pollution Control Board is to consider the reply and pass a fresh order within four weeks thereafter. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Key Issues
1. Whether the closure directions/orders dated April 19, 2025, issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, are liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a hearing, as contemplated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? The petitioner argued that the impugned closure orders, having severe adverse civil consequences, were passed without affording them a prior opportunity to present their case and defend themselves, thereby violating the fundamental principles of natural justice. The respondent-KSPCB, represented by its counsel, could not refute the petitioner's assertion that no hearing was provided before the issuance of the closure directions.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ganapathy Bhat with learned Advocate Mr. Sreedhar Hegde for the petitioner and learned Advocate Mr. Mahesh Choudhary for the respondent-Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.
The petitioner partnership firm, by filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, has called in question the order dated 19th April 2025 passed by the competent authority of respondent-Pollution Control Board, thereby the petitioner is required and directed to close down its unit located at Survey No.61/1 and 61/2 at Seshagiri Halli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluka, which is a small green category plant engaged in ready-mix concrete manufacturing.
Learned Advocate for the petitioner assailed the impugned order on the ground that it was passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. NC: 2025:KHC:17899-DB
When querried whether the petitioner was heard before passing the impugned order, learned Advocate for the respondent Board was at his receiving end. He could not dispute the fact that the petitioner was not heard.
Observance of principles of natural justice was essential, since the impugned order directs closure of the unit and thus has severe adverse civil consequences. The petitioner deserves to be extended opportunity to put forward its case and defend itself. On the aforesaid sole ground, the impugned order is set aside.
1 Therefore, the present petition deserves to be allowed. It is provided that the impugned order dated 19th April 2025 shall be treated as show cause notice. The petitioner shall be given opportunity of filing reply to the proposed action of closure by the Board and shall be given hearing in response to the show cause notice.
2 The petitioner shall be allowed two weeks time to file reply. The reply shall be considered by the respondent-Pollution Control Board and fresh order shall be passed within a period of four weeks thereafter. NC: 2025:KHC:17899-DB
This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, nor has gone into the merits.
1 The order is set aside on the above ground of breach of natural justice. The authority shall decide in accordance with law and on merits.
The petition is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms and stands disposed of. (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
KPS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.