1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I.A.No.2 WITH I.A.Nos.3-6 & 8-10 & 11-12 in I.A.No.2 & I.A.No.7  

IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.5343 OF 2007

TATYASAHEB KORE WARANA S.S.K.LTD. ... APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

SHARAD BABURAO PATIL & ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S)

WITH I.A.Nos.2-3 in C.A.Nos.5413-5414/2007

O R D E R

Heard both sides. The  Maharashtra  Pollution  Control  Board  has  filed  a  

statement to the effect that the petitioner/appellant has complied  

with the directions of this Court and has installed the ESPs.  The  

latest report by the Regional Officer is to the following effect :

“i) The  work  of  installation  of  ESP  No.1  

(310A-1) for the Boiler NO.1 (MR 10652), Boiler No.2  

(MR  8530),  and  Boiler  No.4  (MR  9730)  has  been  

completed  and  it  was  found  in  operation  for  trial  

runs;

ii)  The  work  of  installation  of  ESP  No.2  

(310-B)  for  the  Boiler  No.3  (MR  9443)  has  been  

completed  and  it  was  found  in  operation  for  trial  

runs;

iii) The work of installation of ESP No.3  

(310A-2)  to  the  Boiler  NO.5(MR  11835)  and  Boiler  

No.6(MR 13027) has been completed and it was found in  

operation for trial runs.  A copy of the said report  

is enclosed and marked as an Exh.1.

iv) The  Board  has  carried  out  stack  

monitoring of source emission at ESPs installed to the  

Boilers 1,2, 4 and 3 on 24.11.2009 and 2.12.2009.  The  

analysis results of total particulars matter emission

2

are within permissible limit of 150 mg/Nm 3 which are  

general  emission  standards,  as  per  the  Environment  

(Portection) Rules, 1986 stipulated as a condition in  

the consent.  Copies of reports of air emissions from  

ESPs attached to boiler Nos.12, 4 and 3 carried out on  

24th November,  2009  and  2.12.2009  are  enclosed  and  

marked as an Exh.II.”  

Learned  counsel  for  the  respondents  disputes  the  

genuineness of this certificate and says that the ESPs have not been  

installed.   The  Maharashtra  Pollution  Control  Board,  being  a  

statutory authority, cannot be disbelieved. Having regard to this  

fact, these applications are disposed of with a direction that the  

company would be at liberty to carry on with the crushing work.

..................CJI (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)

...................J. (ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)

...................J. (Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN)

NEW DELHI; 16TH DECEMBER, 2009