- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO. 20584 OF 2025 (GM-POL) BETWEEN: 1. KSR WOOD INDUSTRIES A PROPREITARY CONCERN REP. BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT. DILSHAD SHAKILA W/O. LATE JANAB R. SHAKILAHMED AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.23 MAIN ROAD, GARGESHWARI VILLAGE T. NARASIPURA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI Y.K. NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD PLOT NO. 436-D, FIRST FLOOR KRS ROAD, HEBBAL INDUSTRIAL AREA Digitally signed by SRIDEVI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 METAGALLI, MYSURU RURAL MYSURU-570016. 3. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD PARISARA BHAVAN 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR NO. 49, CHURCH STREET BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R-1 & SRI A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & 3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO.PCB/ENF/SEO-Enf-Cmp/CLOSURE ORDER - WPC/2024-25/132 DATED 05/08/2024 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO RUN THE SAW MILL IN THE ABOVE SAID PROPERTY UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OR PASS OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU ,CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 05.08.2024 passed by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board [KSPCB] inter alia on the ground that the petitioner had been operating its industry(Saw Mill) without obtaining consent to operate [CTO]. This is clearly reflected in the impugned order, the relevant extract of which reads as under. "Whereas, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 22.02.2017 in W.P:375 of 2012 has directed all the State Pollution Control Boards to take immediate action for Closure of all the units which are operating without providing necessary control system and valid Consent of the Board as per ref. (7) above thereby causing pollution in the environment. Whereas, the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal has passed an order on 08.05.2013 in the application No.37/2013 and directed to take suitable action against the units running without valid consent of the State Pollution Control Board vide ref (8) and also directed to take action to stop all the illegally operating factories/industries units immediately. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 Whereas, the Central Pollution Control Board, New Delhi, Government of India while giving direction vide No. B29016/04/06IPC-I/10597- 10636 dated 03.03.2017 vide ref (9) to all State Pollution Control Boards on implementation status of directions under section 18(1) (b) of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act-1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 in the matter of pollution control in Red, Orange & Green category industries as follows, 1. The State Pollution Control Board shall take immediate steps/ legal action to such industrial units (Orange, Red & Green category industries) not to continue their operations till the industries obtain valid consent of the Board for operation under the provisions of section 25 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act-1974 and section 21 the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. 2. The State Pollution Control Board shall publish/place names & address of all such defaulting industries which are operating without consent of the Board in the Website. The State Board has brought to the notice of all the concerned about the above directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court through PUBLIC NOTICE vide newspapers dated 18.03.2017. In view of the above said facts and violations of provision of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act 1974, as per the Board Office Memorandum vide ref (10), the subject is placed before 2nd SLEC meeting for deliberation and decision. The Committee after deliberation, approved to issue closure directions to the said unit without giving any opportunity of hearing." - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 2. The petitioner has been operating the said industry on a property bearing Khata No.167 situated at Main Road, Gargeshwari Village, T. Narasipura Taluk, Mysuru District. The said property was on a lease and the landlord had filed a suit being OS.No.4/2020 before the Additional Civil Judge, T. Narasipura seeking eviction of the petitioner from the said property. The said suit was decreed on 01.03.2024. The petitioner had preferred an appeal (RA.No.27/2024) against the said judgment and decree before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, T. Narasipura. The said appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had filed an appeal (RSA No.457/2025) before this court. The said appeal was dismissed, but with the consent of the landlord, time till 31.03.2026 was granted to the petitioner to vacate the subject premises. 3. Prior to that, the landlord had also made a complaint to KSPCB. The impugned order indicates the fact that the termination of lease was also noted by KSPCB. The present petition is premised on the basis that the impugned closure order has been passed, principally on the basis that the petitioner's lease had been terminated and, on a complaint, made by the landlord. However, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34795-DB WP No. 20584 of 2025 the impugned order indicates that the same has been passed as the petitioner had failed to produce the CTO (consent to operate). There is no document produced on record, which indicates to the contrary. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the saw mill has been running since several years and no opportunity was granted to the petitioner to produce the CTO. Undisputedly the industry cannot operate without the CTO. And, there is no document or material on record to establish that the petitioner had received the CTO. However, we clarify that if the petitioner has obtained the CTO, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach KSPCB with the relevant material. Needless to state that if the said material is produced, the KSPCB shall take appropriate steps for recalling the impugned order. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE SD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22