Smt. Uma Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 972 of 2016

1. Smt. Uma Agrawal W/o Shrikishan, Aged About 62 Years R/o Putrishala Road, Kharsia, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

2. Smt. Anju Agrawal W/o Sunil Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years R/o Putrishala Road, Kharsia, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

3. Smt. Bharti Devi Agrawal W/o Mukesh Agrawal, Aged About 45 Years R/o Post Office Road, Kharsia, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

4. Smt. Pinky Agrawal W/o Vinay Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years R/o Post Office Road, Kharsia, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Housing And Environment, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Post & P S Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board, Through Regional Officer, T.V. Tower Road, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Kharsia, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

4. M/s Monnet Ispat & Energy Limited, Through Its Managing Director, Village & P.O. Naharpali, Tahsil Kharsia, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) Regd. Office At Mannet Marg, Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Varun Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1 & 3 : Shri Arun Sao, Deputy Advocate General. For Respondent No. 2 : Shri Sudhir Bajpai, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 21/07/2017 (1) Learned counse appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent No. 4 is discharging harmful trade effluent and causing pollution from its integrated Steel Plant to the lands of the petitioners, against which the petitioners made complaint before the respondent No. 2 under Section 17(1)(I) and 33-A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,

1974 but the same has not been considered and decided till now and, therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondent No. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Kharsia, District Raigarh to consider and decide the same expeditiously.

(2) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(3) Be that as it may, the respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and take a decision on the complaint made be petitioners strictly in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(4) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

(5) It is made clear that if the grievance subsists, the petitioners are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-