SATGURU AGRO INDUSTRIES vs SALVI CHEMICALS LIMITED
Party Details
- SATGURU AGRO INDUSTRIES
- MAHARASTHRA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
- MPCB REGIONAL OFFICE
- SALVI CHEMICALS LIMITED
Case Summary
SATGURU AGRO INDUSTRIES filed Case No. Original Application No. 205/2023 in the National Green Tribunal on 18 Oct 2023 against MAHARASTHRA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD and MPCB REGIONAL OFFICE. The case has undergone 6 hearings over 9 months. The case is currently pending. 6 orders have been issued in this matter.
Hearing History (6)
- 12SEP 2024Hearing
Judge: Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh Dr. Vijay Kulkarni
- 29MAY 2024Hearing
Judge: Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh Dr. Vijay Kulkarni
- 9APR 2024Hearing
Judge: Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh Dr. Vijay Kulkarni
Orders (6)
- 12SEP 2024judgementView Order ↗
Order No: 6
- 12SEP 2024orderView Order ↗
Order No: 5
- 29MAY 2024orderView Order ↗
Order No: 4
Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗
Page 1 of 2 Item No.3 (Pune Bench) BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION) Original Application No.205/2023(WZ) Earlier Diary No.2704138005812023 Satguru Agro Industries …..Applicant Versus M/s.
Salvi Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. ….Respondents Date of hearing: 12.09.2024 CORAM: HON’BLE MR.
JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR.
VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER Applicant : Ms.
Supriya Dangare, Advocate Respondents : Ms.
Chitrangada Singh, Advocate h/f Mr.
Mandeep Karla, Advocate for R-1/PP Ms.
Manasi Joshi, Advocate for R-2 & 3/MPCB ORDER 1.
In the present Original Application, the grievance of the applicant industry- Satguru Agro Industries is that it has common boundary with the respondent No.1’s industry- M/s.
Salvi Chemicals Ltd. and that there was some seepage happening, which was affecting the applicant’s boundary wall.
2.
In this regard, learned counsel Ms.
Manasi Joshi representing respondent Nos.2 & 3-MPCB has filed reply affidavit dated 05.04.2024, wherein, in para no.6 Sub-Clause A (9), it is recorded that the common boundary wall plaster was found deteriorated but no leakage or seepages were noticed.
3.
In view of above, the learned counsel for applicant has acknowledged before us that there is no seepage now in its land, which is Page 2 of 2 adjoining to the industry of respondent No.1 and therefore, the applicant does not want to contest this matter.
4.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel for applicant before us that adequate measures have been taken by the respondent No.1 in regard to the seepage and therefore, we would like the respondent No.1 to continue to take these measures in future also so that no such leakage happens.
5.
In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for applicant, we dispose of this application accordingly.
6.
Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr.
Vijay Kulkarni, EM September 12, 2024 Original Application No.205/2023(WZ) Earlier Diary No.
Diary No.2704138005812023 P.Kr