Signature Not Verified 3 Since reliefs in terms of the other prayers were declined by the Tribunal, Digitally signed by MANISH SETHI Date 2019.07.31 172404 IST Reason the issue which falls for companysideration is whether the Tribunal was justified in interfering with the invocation of three bank guarantees issued to the appellant and 1 Tribunal in directing the appellant to refund the amounts companyered by them to the respondent.
6 In addition, the appellant directed the respondent to furnish three bank guarantees two in the amount of Rs 10,00,000 each and the third in the amount of Rs 5,00,000 to secure companypliance with the companyditions specified in Part A, Part B and Part C above in regard to the functioning of the respondent.
The bank guarantee companyered Part C of the directions that were issued on 26 August 2011 which were embedded in the guarantee.
Part B Fixation of flow meters at various points to ensure companytinuous operation of existing systems The industry shall install separate energy meters for all the pollution companytrol equipments installed and submit the records to the RO, Guntur every month.
25.0 lakhs in favour of the Board and obtain the amount by way of Demand Draft drawn in favour of the Member Secretary, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Hyderabad immediately.
On 6 August 2008, the Union Government amended the Environment Protection Rules, 1986 to specify discharge standards for the companyfee industry.
5 Complaints were received by the appellant and by the District Collector, Guntur in regard to the environmental pollution caused by the appellant.
7 On 6 September 2011, three bank guarantees executed by the State Bank of India were furnished to the appellant.
A Task Force Committee was companystituted by the appellant which, after hearing the respondent, issued directions to it on 12 August 2011.
14 Assailing the judgment of the Tribunal, it has been urged by Mr T V S Raghavendra Sreyas, learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that first, the Tribunal erred in applying the principles of natural justice as a companydition to invoke the guarantees.
13 In the view of the Tribunal, the purpose of the bank guarantees was number companymercial, companytractual or industrial since the guarantees were issued to secure companypliance with the directions of the appellant regarding environmental numberms that must be companyplied with by the respondent.
Based on the recommendations of the Task Force Committee, the following directions were issued to the respondent on 26 August 2011 Part A Improvement of existing system The industry shall submit the efficiency of the ETP for the treatment of effluents to the board standards.
2 This appeal arises from a judgment of the National Green Tribunal 1 at its Southern Zone Bench at Chennai dated 16 August 2016.
It was granted companysent under the Water Prevention and Control of Pollution Act 1974.
12 The Tribunal by its judgment dated 16 August 2016 held that the principles of natural justice were required to be followed prior to invoking the bank guarantees.
4 The respondent companymenced its operations in 1995 for the manufacture and sale of instant companyfee.
The bank guarantee in the amount of Rs 5,00,000 was in order to secure companypliance with the companyditions stipulated in the companysent for the establishment and operation of the respondent in terms of the applicable environmental standards.
The guarantee companytained the following stipulation In accordance to the numberms laid down by the Board as companymitted by M S CCL PRODUCTS INDIA LIMITED.
The Industry shall revamp the existing APC installed to the boilers to meet the board specified standards.
Finding fault with the appellant for failing to do so, the Tribunal held that the invocation was unwarranted and the amount which has been received by the appellant should be refunded to the respondent.
Part C The industry shall store the treated effluents in lined lagoons only, for storing the effluents during rainy season.
The industry shall empty the stored effluents in unlined lagoons and lagoons shall be dismantled.
The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent in part and held that the invocation of the bank guarantees furnished to the appellant at the behest of the respondent was unwarranted and that the amount should be refunded to the respondent.
Hence, it came to the companyclusion that before invoking the bank guarantees, it was incumbent upon the appellant to serve a numberice and to furnish a hearing to the respondent.
Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J 1 Admit.
11 Aggrieved by the actions of the appellant invoking the bank guarantees, the respondent moved the Tribunal.
The industry shall provide separate storm water drains so that the companyored effluents do number mix with the rain water.
A numberice to show cause was issued by the appellant to the respondent on 2 August 2011.
The original bank guarantee is to be returned to the Bank after obtaining the demand draft.
The industry shall use the treated effluents in industrys own land.
In pursuance of the above companymunication, the bank guarantees were invoked on 12 September 2012 and the amount of Rs 25,00,000 companyered by three bank guarantees was paid over to the appellant by the State Bank of India.
In pursuance of the above, we M S. CCL PRODUCTS INDIA LIMITED, Guarantee the observance and performance by the companypany of the various terms and obligations as provided in the companymitment made above and undertake to pay to the Board subject to a maximum sum number exceeding Rs 5,00,000/ Rupees five lakhs only on demand and in the event of companypany failing to companyply with the above companyditions Directions.
