Ece Industries Limited v. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board & Anr.

1. M/s. ECE Industries Limited was the appellant in Appeal no. 134 of 2018 which was heard on merit by this Tribunal and disposed of by the judgment dated 16 August, 2018. He has preferred this Review Application no. 34 of 2018 to review the said judgment.

2. We have carefully examined the grounds urged in the review application against judgment in question.

3. We have also perused the records in supplementation to the grounds urged in the review application. As could be seen, the review applicant had assailed the closure order passed by the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board dated 3 August, 2018 ordering closure of the industry on the basis of Joint Inspection of the industry in question by the Joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal who found on analysis the samples of the effluent discharge was not meeting the parameters and recorded it as follows:

PH - 2.09, Zinc - 5.37, BOD - 8335 mg/1& COD 2280 mg/l.

4. It was also found that the review appellant's industry was disposing pollutants/effluents adversely affecting the environment and the health of the public in violation of provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Consequently, the Board invoked the power conferred under Section 27(2) read with Section 33(A) of the said Act to direct to stop the activity of the industry and passed the impugned order dated 3 August, 2018.

5. Since in the recent past, we have dealt with similar case in Appeal No. 133/2018 - CNH Industrial (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board which was disposed of on 10 August, 2018. It was felt proper to dispose of the Review Applicant's Appeal No. 134 of 2018 in terms of the said order making it clear that the said order will not be a bar to the Appellant taking steps to remedy the situation and thereafter seek approval from the concerned authority in accordance with law.

6. Further, it is necessary to record that though, we have perused the grounds urged in the review application meticulously, we find no ground made out by the review applicant to review the order in question. The review applicant has failed to show that there is error apparent on record requiring review. It is clear that the appellant is retracting the statement made before this Tribunal and on the other hand urging grounds like in an appeal.

7. For the above said reasons, we find no merit in the review application and hence it is rejected.