M/S Lakshmipriya Steels Pvt. Ltd., v. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 35019 OF 2025 (GM-POL) BETWEEN:

M/S LAKSHMIPRIYA STEELS PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MRS K N VASAVI, INDUSTRY AT SY NO 331/B6, 331/B7 OF DANANAYAKANAKERE AND SY No. 61A, 61B OF GOLLARAHALLI HOSPET TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA 583222

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SADANAND G SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PARISARA BHAVANA, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, NO 49, CHRUCH STREET, BENGALURU 560001

¶2THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER VIJAYANAGAR ZONAL OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION

Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: High Court of Karnataka NC:(2026:KHC:11817-DB( WP(No.(35019(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( CONTROL BOARD, SRI SAI SHARAN PLAZA, NO 71/A, 2ND FLOOR, DAM ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT, HOSAPETE 583203

¶3THE MANAGING DIRECTOR GULBARGA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, STATION ROAD, KALABURAGI 585102

¶4THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GULBARGA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, STATION ROAD, KALABURAGI 585102 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE CLOSURE ORDER DATED 23.10.2025 AT ANNEXURE-A BEARING No. PCB/SEO/MINES/PH-PRO/2025-26/3004 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT No. 1 AND CONSEQUENTLY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶1The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning a closure order dated 23.10.2025 [impugned order] issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board [KSPCB].

¶2The petitioner submits that it has provided all measures to control the pollution as directed by the KSPCB. The only condition, which is not complied with is the construction of a wind-breaking wall. The petitioner submits that although foundation for the said wall is laid, it could not be constructed as the area where the wall was to be constructed was sub-merged on the account of the excessive rains. The petitioner further states that it is committed to installing the said wall and therefore, its operations not be interdicted.

¶3The petitioner states that more than hundred persons are employed in the industrial undertaking and closure of the unit would

render them unemployed apart from causing insurmountable loss to the petitioner.

¶4The present petition was listed on 08.12.2025, when notice was issued to the KSPCB. The KSPCB had thereafter filed a statement of objections pointing out certain measures for preventing pollution that were not been taken. That at a hearing held on 18.02.2026, Mr.Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel appearing for the KSPCB had submitted that a fresh inspection would be conducted and report would be submitted regarding the anti pollution measures that the petitioner has failed to implement. The said statement was made in the context of the controversy arising as the petitioner was claiming that it had taken all measures as directed and the KSPCB was contending to the contrary.

¶5In conformity with the statement made before this Court, officials of KSPCB conducted an inspection and a report has been filed. The conclusions as recorded in the said report are reproduced below:

Conclusion: In view of the above observations, it was noticed that the industry is yet to comply with the followings non-compliances reported in the closure order; • The belt curtains to restrict the cross flow of air to the coal storage shed were not installed. • The approach road from Highway to the unit is not concreted. • The wind breaking barriers of adequate height has not been provided. • The Green belt around the premises is not complied as per the Environmental conditions. This is for kind information and further needful action.

¶6The petitioner has accepted the said conclusions and has filed an affidavit, undertaking that the said deficiencies would be addressed with within an outer limit of eight weeks from date. A copy of the said affidavit has been served to the KSPCB and the same is accepted.

¶7Considering the undertaking given by the petitioner, we consider it apposite to direct the KSPCB to withhold any coercive measures for a period of eight weeks from date. The electricity supply to the petitioner's undertaking, which has been

disconnected shall be restored forthwith. The same would enable the petitioner to carry on its operations.

¶8However, we clarify that if the undertaking as provided is not complied with within the period of eight weeks, the KSPCB shall be at liberty to take such steps as necessary in accordance with law.

¶9The electricity connection restored in compliance of this order, would be disconnected forthwith on any information of non compliance being furnished by the KSPCB to the distributing company-respondent Nos.3 and 4. On KSPCB being satisfied that all necessary measures, as directed by it have been taken, it shall revoke the impugned order as well as any other closure order.

¶10This petition stands disposed of.

¶11All pending applications also stand disposed of.

Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE ND/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 41