The Gauhati High Court has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) regarding pollution at Lanka Railway Station in Nagaon, Assam.
The petitioners, Animesh Dey and nine others, alleged harmful dust materials like fly-ash, clinker, pet coke, coal, and cement were being loaded and unloaded without proper measures, causing pollution.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair took note of the issue and issued notices to respondents, including the Union of India, Railway authorities, and Pollution Control Board, Assam (PCBA). The PCBA stated it had issued notices to Railway authorities in May 2024 and directed them to contain pollution.
The PCBA later issued a “Consent to Operate” to Lanka Goods Shed, Northeast Frontier Railway, with conditions to control pollution. The conditions included general and specific measures for air, water, plastic waste, e-waste, and hazardous waste aspects.
The petitioners’ counsel argued the “Consent to Operate” order lacked specificity on loading and unloading operations.
However, the High Court held the PCBA’s conditions were sufficient, and the board could withdraw consent if pollution control measures were inadequate.
The Bench disposed of the PIL, stating no further orders were required. The PCBA retains the liberty to take action against the industry if pollution levels are not controlled.
The post appeared first on .
The petitioners, Animesh Dey and nine others, alleged harmful dust materials like fly-ash, clinker, pet coke, coal, and cement were being loaded and unloaded without proper measures, causing pollution.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair took note of the issue and issued notices to respondents, including the Union of India, Railway authorities, and Pollution Control Board, Assam (PCBA). The PCBA stated it had issued notices to Railway authorities in May 2024 and directed them to contain pollution.
The PCBA later issued a “Consent to Operate” to Lanka Goods Shed, Northeast Frontier Railway, with conditions to control pollution. The conditions included general and specific measures for air, water, plastic waste, e-waste, and hazardous waste aspects.
The petitioners’ counsel argued the “Consent to Operate” order lacked specificity on loading and unloading operations.
However, the High Court held the PCBA’s conditions were sufficient, and the board could withdraw consent if pollution control measures were inadequate.
The Bench disposed of the PIL, stating no further orders were required. The PCBA retains the liberty to take action against the industry if pollution levels are not controlled.
The post appeared first on .