#Pollution Control Board

The Uttarakhand High Court set aside Pollution Control Board notices demanding environmental compensation because the Board failed to give the affected party notice and a hearing, breaching Rule 46 and natural-justice principles. The decision mandates that any authority must follow due-process before imposing compensation liabilities, impacting polluters and other parties facing PCB compensation claims.

The National Green Tribunal ruled that an oral inspection notice under Section 21(3) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act is legally sufficient only when an authorized agent of the unit is present and does not object, reinforcing procedural fairness in pollution enforcement. This clarifies the threshold for admissibility of environmental samples and invalidates compensation calculated on flawed default periods without proper notice.

Supreme Court rules that industries operating in good faith under Pollution Control Board consent (CTE/CTO) cannot be shut down merely for lacking prior Environmental Clearance (EC), provided they applied for EC in a timely manner. The judgment balances regulatory compliance with operational continuity for formaldehyde units in Rajasthan and Haryana.

Bombay High Court at Goa holds that only a specific board resolution authorizing prosecution against a particular entity validates a complaint under the Air Act. Legal clarity for pollution regulators.