- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51143-DB WP No. 35362 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 35362 OF 2025 (GM-POL) BETWEEN: 1. MR ABDUL SALAM, S/O T HASANABBA AGED 60 YEARS R/AT NO.18-1-7/37, 602, 5TH FLOOR PRESTIGE WESTHOLME STURROCK ROAD, ATTAVARA FALNIR, MANGALURU-575 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR MG.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALURU-560001 2. THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51143-DB WP No. 35362 of 2025 PARISARA BHAVANA, BENGALURU-560001 3. THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD PARISARA BHAVANA 10B BAIKAMPADY INDUSTRIAL AREA MANGALURU-575 011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R-1 SRI A MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED 09/09/2025, NO.PCB/SEO-ENF-CMP/CLOSURE ORDER- WPC/2025-26/229 AND CLOSURE ORDRE-APC/2025-26/230 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A)& ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51143-DB WP No. 35362 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. Issue notice. Ms.Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1. Mr.A.Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning a closure order dated 09.09.2025 passed by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board [KSPCB]. The petitioner states that it is in the business of construction of civil engineering projects and had set up a hot mixing plant on the land located in Survey No.98/10 at Tenka Yekkar Village, Mangalore Taluk. The petitioner claims that he had also put up the plant and machineries, which were equipped with adequate air pollution control devices as per the prescribed standards and the applicable rules. 3. It is stated that certain local villagers who had personal animosity towards the petitioner had lodged complaints with KSPCB alleging that the petitioner's plant is generating pollution. It - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51143-DB WP No. 35362 of 2025 emits smoke as well as smell. The petitioner alleges that without conducting a proper site inspection or giving an opportunity of personal hearing, KSPCB has mechanically issued the impugned closure order. 4. A plain reading of the impugned closure order indicates that it has been issued inter-alia for the reason that the petitioner had neither obtained the consent for establishment [CFE] or consent to operate [CTO]. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that although the petitioner's unit is fully compliant with the relevant laws, he had inadvertently not obtained the CTO. He also states that since the petitioner had immediately taken steps to apply for the CTO, the application has not been considered on account of the impugned closure order. 6. There is no cavil that the petitioner cannot operate a unit which falls in orange category, without obtaining the CTO. As noted above the petitioner also claims that he has filed an application for obtaining the CTO. Since the impugned closure order is premised on the basis that it is operating contrary to law - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51143-DB WP No. 35362 of 2025 inasmuch as the petitioner had not obtained the CTO, we find that the petitioner's challenge to the same must fail. 7. Having stated the above, we direct that if the petitioner has filed an application for obtaining CTO, KSPCB shall, on an urgent basis, conduct an inspection and process the said application. If the petitioner's unit is found to be compliant with the relevant standards and the petitioner has taken adequate measures for control of pollution, KSPCB shall issue the CTO as expeditiously as possible. 8. In the event the petitioner has not applied for the CTO as yet, the petitioner is granted the liberty to do so. Needless to say that the said application will be examined in accordance with law. 9. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KMV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10