BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

SOUTHERN ZONE,

Appeal No.26 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

M.J.Kurian Vs. The Secretary to Government, Proprietor, JMN Traders, Environment and Forest Department, 34, Kamaraj Salai, Village, Secretariat, Chennai 600060 Chennai and others

Appeal No.28 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

S.S.Aqua Power Products Vs. The Secretary to Government, Rep. by its Partner, D.Saravanan Environment and Forest Department, No.1/103, Perumal Koil Street, Secretariat, Kamarajar Salai, Periamathur Village, Chennai and others Taluk, District Appeal No.29 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

Dhinagar Babu Vs. The Secretary to Government, Partner, Evergreen Enterprises Environment and Forest Department, No.2 Devi Nagar Road, Kumarappapuram, Secretariat, Milk Colony, Chennai -51 Chennai and others

Appeal No.30 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

Ramadoss Vs. The Secretary to Government, Proprietor: K.K.Aqua Product Environment and Forest Department, No.40, Telephone Colony, Secretariat, Mathur Village, Chennai 600068 Chennai and others

Appeal No.31 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

D.Goverthan Vs. The Secretary to Government, Partner: A.P.D.Gomala Enterprises Environment and Forest Department, S.No.115/2A1, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Secretariat, Kamarajar Salai, Mathur, Chennai and others Chennai 600068 Appeal No.32 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

A.Jagaveerapandian Vs. The Secretary to Government, Proprietor, Environment and Forest Department, Pandia’s Aqua Leela Agro Products, Secretariat, No.410/4, Aziz Nagar, Madhavaram Chennai and others Chennai 600060

Legal Practioners for Applicant (s) Legal Practitioners for Respondents M/s.M.Kamalanathan & Mr.M.K.Subramanian, E.Manoharan R.Thomas & P.Velmani for R1, R4 & R9

Mr.Su.Srinivasan for R3 Mr.Gnanasekaran for R6 & R7 Mrs.Yasmeen Ali for R2 & R8 Mr.Janakiraman for R5

Appeal No.33 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

S.Vinayagam Vs. The Secretary to Government, Proprietor, Ambiga Enterprises Environment and Forest Department, 428/2, Kamarajar Salai, Agarson Secretariat, College Road, Manjambakkam, Chennai and others Madhavaram,

Appeal No.34 of 2017 Appellant (s) Respondents

Arunkumar Vs. The Secretary to Government, Proprietor, Sri Venkateswara Enterprises Environment and Forest Department, N o.1, Perumal Koil Street,Elumalai Thottam Secretariat, Near AVM Nagar, Madhavaram Chennai and others Taluk, Chennai 600060

Legal Practioners for Applicant (s) Legal Practitioners for Respondents

M/s.Kamalanathan & R.Thomas Mr.Su.Srinivasan for R3 in Appeal No.26, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 of 2017 Mrs.Yasmeen Ali in Appeal No.26, 28 to 34 of 2017

Note of the Orders of the Tribunal Registry Date: 12th May, 2017 Item No.17 to

24 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well

as respondents.

Mr.V.Prakash, learned Senior Counsel representing the people in the

area seeks permission to file an application for impleadment. If such

application is filed and is in order, the Registry shall number the same and

post the same on the next date of hearing.

In our order dated 08.05.2017, we have directed the respondents to

effect closure of the units which are functioning without obtaining ‘consent’

from the State Pollution Control Board (Board).

It was stated that nearly 33 units which are running at Mathur,

Manjambakkam, Madhavaram, , and , the

Tahsildar, Madhavaram who is present in the Tribunal, has submitted that he has visited the area based on the complaints received from the Public and more than 11 units have been closed having found that those units have been extracting water illegally. However, he submits that in so far as it relates to the appellants in respect of 8 appeals, pursuant to the order passed by the Board under Section 33A of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (Water Act) and 31A of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (Air Act) the units are closed and they are not extracting water. This fact is being disputed by Mr.V.Prakash, learned

Senior Counsel. We make it clear that this will be decided after the impleadment application is filed.

It is not in dispute that some interim order is passed by Hon’ble High

Court of Madras in respect of G.O. passed by the Government.

Mr.Prakash submits that steps are being made for the purpose of vacating the order.

We are of the considered view that unless Hon’ble High Court passes appropriate order, it may not be possible for this Tribunal to pass any order which may be contra to the order which is likely to be passed by the High Court. Therefore, we reiterate our earlier order dated 08.05.2017 and we direct the Board as well as Tahsildar to see that the units which are running illegally without obtaining ‘consent’, shall not be permitted not only to carry on the activity but also any clandestine activity of extraction of water should be stopped.

Mr.M.Kamalanathan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that in so far as it relates to the appellants are after filing of the appeals, all the appellants have either applied or likely to apply for consent

in a day or two. If such application is filed and is in order, and it is for the

Board to pass appropriate orders in the manner known to law.

Mr.P.Vasudevan, District Environmental Engineer, Pollution Control

Board, Ambattur who is present in the Tribunal submits that if such applications are received and are in order, appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law within a period of 10 days. The learned counsel appearing for the Board submits that she will file necessary documents during the course of the day after serving copy to the learned counsel appearing on the other side. She may do so.

Post these appeals for further orders on 25.05.2017.

…...... , JM (Justice Dr.P.Jyothimani)

…...... ,EM (Shri P.S. Rao)